MozillaZine

Waterfox 9: Is it really faster than Firefox?

Discussion of third-party/unofficial Firefox/Thunderbird/SeaMonkey builds.
Anakunda

User avatar
 
Posts: 159
Joined: July 5th, 2010, 1:23 am

Post Posted January 1st, 2012, 7:50 am

HI

Anybody tried out Waterfox 9 ? (http://waterfoxproj.sourceforge.net/downloads)

It's claimed to be faster build of Firefox as it is compiled with 64bit code. I'm quite on doubts, benchmark on Browsermark gives slightly better score to Waterfox but on Peacekeeper I always get better score with Firefox, don't know why. More people can compare these two browsers on Peacekeeper and post results?

patrickjdempsey

User avatar
 
Posts: 22034
Joined: October 23rd, 2008, 11:43 am
Location: Asheville NC

Post Posted January 1st, 2012, 2:00 pm

Mozilla also builds a 64-bit Firefox for Windows but they don't officially support it yet. I'm not sure if Waterfox is any different than Mozilla's build. Of course you'll have to have 64-bit plugins to run it.
Tip of the day: If it has "toolbar" in the name, it's crap.
What my avatar is about: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/seamonkey/addon/sea-fox/

patrickjdempsey

User avatar
 
Posts: 22034
Joined: October 23rd, 2008, 11:43 am
Location: Asheville NC

Post Posted January 1st, 2012, 2:03 pm

From the horse's mouth:

http://www.overclock.net/t/975626/water ... t_12887050

Originally Posted by 78@pwnt4lif3 View Post wrote:WOW a 64bit? I still don't know if i should try it. Cuz it's a modified browser. Kinda sketchy but i await results from others til i try, i applaud you for adding 64bit!

Thanks. I hardly did much, just recompiled the program :P
Tip of the day: If it has "toolbar" in the name, it's crap.
What my avatar is about: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/seamonkey/addon/sea-fox/

Anakunda

User avatar
 
Posts: 159
Joined: July 5th, 2010, 1:23 am

Post Posted January 1st, 2012, 2:24 pm

YEAH I know. NP. got 64bit flash and its works. no problem.
I was rather interested in the speed. Peacekeeper doesnot clearly measure it's faster on my PC. To be concrete regarding Peacekeeper its yet slower than FF.
I want more experiences to know beter if tht's just me or is it really slower.

patrickjdempsey

User avatar
 
Posts: 22034
Joined: October 23rd, 2008, 11:43 am
Location: Asheville NC

Post Posted January 1st, 2012, 2:29 pm

When doing benchmarking you need a stack of data... like 30-40 tests each and average the results. You also need to run in a clean profile with no extensions... without doing all of that running a benchmark is pointless.
Tip of the day: If it has "toolbar" in the name, it's crap.
What my avatar is about: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/seamonkey/addon/sea-fox/

Anakunda

User avatar
 
Posts: 159
Joined: July 5th, 2010, 1:23 am

Post Posted January 1st, 2012, 2:34 pm

I have measured in clean profile and it's ~30% faster than my user profile.
But even in clean profile Waterfox proved to be slightly slower than Firefox, I did two benchmarks for each browser.

minghegy
 
Posts: 5
Joined: January 2nd, 2012, 8:50 pm

Post Posted January 2nd, 2012, 9:28 pm

Its Javascript performance is so poor, in fact all 64bit builds have a poor js performance.

Rickkins
 
Posts: 480
Joined: January 12th, 2004, 3:25 pm

Post Posted January 13th, 2012, 6:43 pm

I've been using it for a while now.... very snappy. Never bothered with any so-called measurements, but I can say without hesitation that it certainly seems much snappier than firefox 32.

patrickjdempsey

User avatar
 
Posts: 22034
Joined: October 23rd, 2008, 11:43 am
Location: Asheville NC

Post Posted January 13th, 2012, 10:27 pm

I'm under the opinion that a vast majority of the mainstream custom "builds" of Firefox are nothing more than sugar pills. The placebo effect can be very powerful when you tell them they are using something that's faster, they tend to believe it... it's basically Microsoft's entire security model for IE. ;)
Tip of the day: If it has "toolbar" in the name, it's crap.
What my avatar is about: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/seamonkey/addon/sea-fox/

Rickkins
 
Posts: 480
Joined: January 12th, 2004, 3:25 pm

Post Posted January 14th, 2012, 6:13 am

Hahaha....good one. Much easier than actually trying it for yourself...

Rickkins
 
Posts: 480
Joined: January 12th, 2004, 3:25 pm

Post Posted January 14th, 2012, 6:25 am

patrickjdempsey wrote:From the horse's mouth:

http://www.overclock.net/t/975626/water ... t_12887050

Originally Posted by 78@pwnt4lif3 View Post wrote:WOW a 64bit? I still don't know if i should try it. Cuz it's a modified browser. Kinda sketchy but i await results from others til i try, i applaud you for adding 64bit!

Thanks. I hardly did much, just recompiled the program :P


Very slick, sport. Take a quote from the very first build and present it as representative of it's current state.

Anakunda

User avatar
 
Posts: 159
Joined: July 5th, 2010, 1:23 am

Post Posted January 14th, 2012, 6:26 am

I did another two clean benchmarks and Waterfox was tightly better this time, but just a several point better, definitely not sharply better.
Because the overall score is compound from more partial tests, it looks that Waterfox clearly loses in some tasks against Firefox.

patrickjdempsey

User avatar
 
Posts: 22034
Joined: October 23rd, 2008, 11:43 am
Location: Asheville NC

Post Posted January 14th, 2012, 7:28 am

Rickkins wrote:Very slick, sport. Take a quote from the very first build and present it as representative of it's current state.


I think your jabs at my laziness in research would probably come across more convincing if you provided some information based on your own research for others to read... otherwise it just sounds like arm chair heckling.

On the surface Waterfox appears to me to be a completely redundant rebranding of 64-bit Firefox. If you have some evidence that it's not, the OP would probably find it really helpful if you provided such evidence.
Tip of the day: If it has "toolbar" in the name, it's crap.
What my avatar is about: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/seamonkey/addon/sea-fox/

Rickkins
 
Posts: 480
Joined: January 12th, 2004, 3:25 pm

Post Posted January 14th, 2012, 10:16 am

patrickjdempsey wrote:
... otherwise it just sounds like arm chair heckling.


Well of course it is, don't be ridiculous... :P


patrickjdempsey wrote:On the surface Waterfox appears to me to be a completely redundant rebranding of 64-bit Firefox. If you have some evidence that it's not, the OP would probably find it really helpful if you provided such evidence.


What surface....you've never even tried it, have you...??

patrickjdempsey

User avatar
 
Posts: 22034
Joined: October 23rd, 2008, 11:43 am
Location: Asheville NC

Post Posted January 14th, 2012, 2:35 pm

I honestly can't tell the speed difference between Firefox 9.0 and the Nightly... they all seem fast to me. Good luck.
Tip of the day: If it has "toolbar" in the name, it's crap.
What my avatar is about: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/seamonkey/addon/sea-fox/

Return to Third Party/Unofficial Builds


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests