Microsoft: IE 8 is often faster than Firefox, Chrome or Safari

Sorry, benchmark followers. Not that it actually matters--in real world usage, all of these products actually perform similarly--but it turns out that the darling of Web browser benchmarks really isn't Safari. Or Chrome. Or even Firefox. It's IE 8:

Measuring Browser Performance: Understanding issues in benchmarking and performance analysis

Brief Description

This document explains the various browser and network components and how each piece can impact performance when benchmarking.

Overview

This document explains the various browser and network components and how each piece can impact performance when benchmarking. The document also compares the capabilities and limitations of various benchmarking tools, as well as ways to design tests to avoid these issues. Also included is an overview of instructions on how to set up a benchmarking environment to conduct some of the testing processes discussed in the document.

Too dry? How about a video? :)

Recently, there's been a lot of discussion about fast browsers ... lots of talk about lab testing that involves microbenchmarks that most consumers have never heard of ... And that doesn't show what's really going on.

What really matters is you.

You want things to move quickly on the web, with real web pages, in real life.

We agree.

We take your experience seriously.

Browser speed is one of the things we test in our performance lab in Redmond.

As it turns out, Internet Explorer 8 is one of the fastest browsers.

To ensure accurate testing, many factors are taken into account ... Network connectivity and congestion. Network device latency. Resource competition. Browser caching. Router caching.

That's pretty pointy-headed.

The real deal is ... How quickly can you get where you want to go, and do what you want to do?

To make sure that Internet Explorer 8 gives you a good answer to that question ... We test all day long ... Against earlier versions of Internet Explorer ... Against competing browsers ... Including Firefox's shipping version, 3.05 ... And Chrome's shipping version, 1.0. [They also tested against Safari 3.x and 4.x betas --Paul]

... And the results may surprise you.

Loading the world's 25 most visited web sites is a good way to see real world experiences side-by-side.

There's rigor in the methodology that's more than a stopwatch ... Watch closely .... and don't blink.

Speed tests ensue. IE 8 wins. And when it doesn't win, the differences are so small, they're not detectable by the human eye.

Internet Explorer 8 loads faster on:

5 of the top 10 web sites.

12 of the top 25.

3 times as many as Firefox.

1/3 more than Chrome.

Internet Explorer is fast. Just like other browsers.

The crowd goes wild. Actually, the crowd is confused. Because they've been sold a load of bull.

Which raises an interesting point, and what will be the central theme of my IE 8 review next week: Today's browsers all perform well, and in the real world, you don't actually notice a performance difference between any of them. (I saw exactly this when I looked at the supposedly superior Safari 4 beta.) What matters is what the browser brings to the table in the form of security and functionality, in how it makes you more productive on the web.

You know, IE 8 ain't so bad, folks.

Discuss this Article 49

kenmcnamee
on Mar 12, 2009
Until the IE8 RC I would've laughed at the idea that IE8 was even in the same ballpark as Chrome, Safari or Firefox. However, I've seen very noticeable speed improvements in IE8 since the RC and I'm having a hard time perceiving a difference between it and my browser of choice, Chrome. Firefox 3.0 is definitely slower than IE8, as far as my eye can tell, but I haven't tried Firefox 3.1yet which I hear is faster.
Mum
on Mar 12, 2009
Great. They're now nearly halfway through. When Microsoft finish optimizing their browser for the top 25 web sites I expect them to do the same to the remaining 100 million. Or billion. Or whatever. What makes me drool even more is a possibility of some sort of compatibility with stuff like css etc in IE8. Yay!
johnbaxter
on Mar 12, 2009
I rather like IE 8. And I don't particularly like Firefox. I use Safari on Mac (which means for most of my web access) except for a few pages where Firefox works better. But I see not point in Safari on Windows. On Windows, I use mostly IE8, a bit of Chrome, and Firefox now and then. All of that is subjective of course. The speed problem primarily isn't the browsers--it is the idiot web "designers" and coders. Last time (a few years ago) I went to the Delta Airlines site, the top page had 537 elements. Stupid. But then, I prefer a page like Google's top page over the garish nonsense which is Yahoo's. Show me the information--use an image if that provides the information better than text would. Forget the junk. Forget the Flash etc etc except in rare cases. Again subjective. But effective: Yahoo's top page kept me away for a long time, leaving me with no way to judge the relative merits of Yahoo search vs Google (or even Microsoft).
subzerohitman721
on Mar 12, 2009
I hate to say it but once again the Borg (Microsoft) have analyzed and adapted. This is Microsoft's greatest strength. They adapt quickly. First, netbooks and now IE 8. All this without Bill Gates full time as well. Ozzie and Sinofsky's stock keeps rising. This is really going to make the new browser wars interesting. Lets see if Google, Mozilla, and Apple can fend this off.
nowimnothing
on Mar 12, 2009
It is pretty darn ironic that their results show that IE loads mozilla.org and google.com faster than firefox or chrome, respectively, and that firefox and chrome load microsoft.com and msn.com, respectively, faster than IE.
Ocean
on Mar 12, 2009
This is interesting: French police: we saved millions of euros by adopting Ubuntu The Gendarmerie began its transition to open source software in 2005 when it replaced Microsoft Office with OpenOffice.org across the entire organization. It gradually adopted other open source software applications, including Firefox and Thunderbird. After the launch of Windows Vista in 2006, it decided to phase out Windows and incrementally migrate to Ubuntu. http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/03/french-police-saves-mill...
yipcanjo
on Mar 12, 2009
I rather enjoyed using IE8 on Win7, and would probably continue to use it save for one thing..... AdBlock-type program. I've been using Firefox for quite some time (imperfections and all), but what I've *really* appreciated is the AdBlockPro add-on that makes my browsing much more enjoyable. Trust me, I don't miss the ads, Flash-crap, popups, and everything else. There is an adblock product -- IE7Pro -- for IE browsers that probably works fine, but it seems somewhat buggy in IE8, which isn't officially supported yet (in their defense). I will be keeping my eye on that, however. On a related note, IE8 seems to *always* want to open new windows, instead of just a new tab. Obnoxious. Is there a fix for that?
subzerohitman721
on Mar 12, 2009
@yipcanjo, I've used IE7 Pro on my notebook and I truely love the product. I never did put it on my desktop, though I probably should have. Anyways, when IE 8 officially gets supported by them, I'd do it. I love IE7 Pro's download manager. It also has a spell checker, so when you see errors on my writing, its usually because I'm not using IE 7 Pro. However, I've avoided using it in Windows 7 because I wanted to save that test to an officially supported version. However, I'd say Vista users should strongly consider it.
Lindy
on Mar 12, 2009
And Apple claims Safari is the fastest. I am not going to believe either MS or Apple. Total hogwash. Links to MS touting speed of their products are worthless IMHO. 3rd party testing when not BIASED are much better. Post the results 6 months from now when IE8, FF 3.1 (or 3.5 now I guess) and Sarfari 4.0 are all RTM, and they come from some place that is not biased. Not that I really care about browser speed really, but I will only use IE8 when my company moves to it and since we are still on IE6 because IE7 breaks internal (shrepoint 2003 stuff) applications, it wont be anytime soon.
Rostov
on Mar 12, 2009
@Ocean This is interesting: get your own blog.
subzerohitman721
on Mar 12, 2009
@Lindy, Still using IE 6? My sympathies. Now I know why you're so anti-Microsoft. I switched to IE7 when it was in RC, because of IE 6. All of my friends were like, "I don't like it. It breaks this and that." I switched and never looked back. Eventually, they switched too. I think they got tired of IE patches so frequently. Thankfully, IE 7 has been good enough for me, that I haven't migrated my Vista one's yet to IE 8. When IE 8 RTW's, I'll definitely migrate on day one.
Lindy
on Mar 12, 2009
@rostov...make him:)
kenmcnamee
on Mar 12, 2009
yipcanjo: If you go into Internet Options -> Tab Settings, I believe you can fix your problem by setting Open Links and Open Popups to "a new tab".
SwampYankee
on Mar 12, 2009
No, It can never be faster. Even if it was faster it could not be faster. You know why? Because Adblock does not support IE! That is why I don't use IE. I don't like to be marked to. If I can block ad's I surf faster. Firefox has full Adblock support so it is faster & better. Now if IE had Adblock............ I'd switch
DRWAM
on Mar 12, 2009
FF 3.1 doesn't seem any faster to me. We finally upgraded our teleradiology software at the hospitals [our office uses the same GE Centricity, but updated over a year ago to enable IE7 compatibility]. We still get a popup warning that the software was only tested with IE 5.5! Now you know why GE stock tanked. I installed Safari 4 beta on my Mac and really don't see any difference as well, especially a 40X difference. Well I'm finally giving in and updating the XP box to SP3. If Centricity doesn't work on it, I have two Vista installs that work. Wish me luck as it DLing right now.
tayme
on Mar 12, 2009
I'm hoping that "lotsamystuff" and Waethorn bring their Pixar battle royal to this thread, since the other one is closed. It really is pretty funny to read that stuff. Thanks for the entertainment, guys(?). --tayme
RunTimeError
on Mar 12, 2009
A browser is a browser is a browser. Pick one and move on.
lehenbauer
on Mar 12, 2009
Yeah IE's only like 300 times slower at Javascript than Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. Kind of important since it's relevant to next-gen browser-based apps. Will Microsoft get past their fear of browser-based apps and make IE fast at Javascript? I think they'll have to, but they won't like it.
Waethorn
on Mar 12, 2009
"On a related note, IE8 seems to *always* want to open new windows, instead of just a new tab. Obnoxious. Is there a fix for that?" Ctrl+click on hyperlinks is your friend. "I'm hoping that "lotsamystuff" and Waethorn bring their Pixar battle royal to this thread, since the other one is closed." I stopped caring about 5 articles back. Nobody cares about little short things that Pixar does. Maybe losta does, heh. The whole point is I was making was that I was using RenderMan on a PC long before Pixar was a well-known animation company, and making *feature length* movies through their association with Disney. Losta still debates that though. "Well I'm finally giving in and updating the XP box to SP3." Centricity works on XP SP3. I had worked on a radiologist's home PC recently. And yes, it still says it only works on IE5.5 and 6, but getting the ActiveX control to install with the constant page refreshing is a pain in IE7 due to the new security options. They use the web version now, but used to use the actual locally-installed software version prior to that. Something about "Workstation something-or-other 3" being upgraded to 4. Dunno much beyond that. I couldn't even install the entire package that was given to him by the IT staff because it literally looked like they copied the Program Files folder onto a CD directly as there was absolutely no installer for the program. The resulting phone call to their help desk made me conclude that they're incompetent since they had absolutely no idea how to even install the software that was given to him.
techfan
on Mar 12, 2009
Is speed really that important? I mean, I like it when a site loads fast but as long as the page doesn't take eons and half a second to load, I'm fine with it. I have tried Firefox, Safari, Chrome and Opera yet I always go back to IE. IE and IE7Pro is all I need. I've been using IE since I first got a computer and IE7Pro since IE7. I don't need anything else.
DRWAM
on Mar 12, 2009
Thanks Wae. Centricity with the updates works, but the hospital only recently updated it to make it compatible, otherwise, the continuous ActiveX control loading was perpetual. Anyway, I took your advise [and was tired of Subman bragging how great IE 7 security was] so I just installed it and SP3 a few minutes ago. After it repaired the network, then everything worked perfectly. The images look nicer on IE 7 than FF, even on Leopard. I have the same, monitor [Dell FP2001 20 in 1600x 1200], but the video card on my Mac Pro Tower is much newer [ATI 1900XT vs ATI X800 Pro on my PC]. Any how, thanks, and thanks to you too Sub, Dipsh and Mike. Security is more important now that the kids are on the computers every day. Doc
Waethorn
on Mar 12, 2009
@Doc: IE7 has a particular colour profile that matches Windows. The one in IE6 will convert CMYK images (and also especially RGB .PNG's) rather badly. Other browsers are probably using their own colour space conversion profiles.
lotsamystuff
on Mar 12, 2009
"I stopped caring about 5 articles back" And yet, you brought it up. "Nobody cares about little short things that Pixar does." Interesting comment, considering that those "little short things" have been consistent moneymakers and award-winners for Pixar, led them to 1995's biggest IPO, and have done more to advance the industry than you could ever dream of from your bargain-basement PC shop. "The whole point is I was making was that I was using RenderMan on a PC long before Pixar was a well-known animation company, and making *feature length* movies through their association with Disney." Backpedal, backpedal, backpedal. When you lose on facts, attempt to reframe the discussion by restating your words. Nice. Very GW of you. As an animation company, Pixar was very well-known, having been nominated for an Academy Award® in1987 when Microsoft was still shipping version 1. By the time you allegedly started putzing around with RenderMan, one of those "little short things" had already WON an Academy Award, and Pixar was an established leader in computer animation. I know it must pain you, since it was the visionary leadership of Steve Jobs that took Pixar to stratospheric heights of artistic and financial success. You, on the other hand, assemble PCs with "helper cat". Good for you.
lotsamystuff
on Mar 12, 2009
"It really is pretty funny to read that stuff. Thanks for the entertainment" You're welcome. :-)
subzerohitman721
on Mar 12, 2009
@DRWAM Your insight has always been just valuable and enlightening. However, as much as I harp on Mac and Linux security, Microsoft still has a long ways to go as well. MIcrosoft's 24.22 days of risk needs to be lowered. I think the response should be 24 hours. But the 72 days for Ubuntu and 97.95 days for Apple is completely unacceptable. Another argument for another day. My kids will be shortly of computer age, so I have to be ready for that eventuality. However, my son has already figured out that Control+ESC followed by U initiates a shutdown in Windows XP. He did it three times on two different machines. Just grabbing a drink for one second, then I'm hearing the Windows XP shutdown theme! I turn my head to see my son on the U key and XP is shutting down. I swear these kids are getting to smart these days. LOL.
whiplash55
on Mar 12, 2009
I'm using IE8 about half the time. There are certain sites that wont work with Firefox for me at all, like my Credit Union's. The big issue with Firefox 3.07 is the load time, fortunately the 3.1 beta of Firefox loads much faster and looks like a winner once they get it released. IE 8 is fast and fairly stable but it doesn't have the features I need that make me stay with Firefox.
gfryesc1
on Mar 12, 2009
I'd think I'd have to see benchmarks from an independent 3rd party instead of taking Microsoft's [and Paul's] word for it. Microsoft has been suspect in the past about their numbers. That is hardly original, Apple has that trick down as well. It's always smarter to verify.
wjglenn141
on Mar 12, 2009
Are benchmarks (no matter who conducts them) really anything more than bragging rights? What matters is what you like. I enjoy FF because of its extension support. Ad-block, sure, but several others that just make my browsing experience more pleasant and productive. Though I appreciate the technical improvements that Chrome offers (such as launching different tabs as different processes), I just don't like the way it feels. Ditto for Safari. IE 8 is nice and if it was as extensible as FF, I might use it as my primary browser. But it isn't. Who really cares if pages load .5 seconds faster in one browser or another. Does anyone really choose a browser that way?
DRWAM
on Mar 12, 2009
Sub, I feel your pain...times three! Once they get comfortable with IE 7 I will update the last PC. It used to be an eMachine, until I replaced the power supply, motherboard, CPU, RAM, hard drive and video card, at different times when they died [accept the CPU and vid card]. All that's left is the box and DVD drive. I actually prefer IE 7 to FF. As I said, the images look better. Thanks again, Doc
dechah
on Mar 12, 2009
IE7 and IE8 can use the excellent IE7Pro add on. It gives IE users adblock, download scripts for many different sites, including Youtube, as well as the ability to backup favorites to the cloud and sync them with other installs of IE. I use most of IE7Pro's features except their file downloader. I prefer Reget. So for me, 1 addon is preferable to a myriad of different extensions for Firefox to do the same thing.
subzerohitman721
on Mar 12, 2009
@lotsa & Wae. The pre-cursor to Renderman was developed in the early 1980's and the algorithm was called REYES (Renders Everything You Ever Saw) and the program was called Motion Doctor. The REYES algorithm and Motion Doctor was 1st implemented in for the now infamous "Project Genesis Summary", the computer rendering of the Genesis Device in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. What Renderman does now and is more advance Shading Language, the fundamental tech of it was in the early 1980's. So Wae and lotsa, you are both right, and you're both wrong. The actual name Renderman wasn't made until Pixar was spun off to Jobs in 1986. But the pre-cursor technology that was similar was very much available before and during the launch of Windows 1, in November 20, 1985. Jobs did not get his hands on Pixar until 1986.
Lindy
on Mar 12, 2009
@Subzero "Still using IE 6? My sympathies" Not by choice trust me. Most of our sharepoint enviroment is now on 2007, some still on 2003, however they are tied into critical stuff like People Soft redirects etc that break with IE7. Honestly since we are locked down like crazy IE6 works well. At home FF all the way.
robertsjoe
on Mar 12, 2009
You surely have been sold a load of bull. By Microsoft. Convenient that Safari 4 wasn't in the tests.
lotsamystuff
on Mar 12, 2009
"Convenient that Safari 4 wasn't in the tests." "[They also tested against Safari 3.x and 4.x betas --Paul]" Interesting, Paul, because that's not in the .PDF file from the very "study" you reported on and linked to. I hate to agree with "robertsjoe", but unless you know something about this study (and can verify it) that's not in the report, I'd say he's right. Safari doesn't appear anywhere in the report. You're either making an assumption, omitting critical information, or making sh1t up.
truffoo0
on Mar 12, 2009
@lotsa/roberts The video says that they test against competing browers, so I take that to mean that Safari would have been in the tests. Why it wasn't in the published benchmarking report/video does raise some questions. All benchmarks (including "independent" ones) need to be taken with a huge grain of salt. Few are truely unbiased or at least designed/scoped to increase the chances of a certain outcome. Personally, i've been quite happy with IE7 with IE7Pro, while I also use FF Portable from time to time to test sites. Like many have said above (and the MS Video says), it's not all about performance. If a site takes 1 or 2 seconds to load really makes no difference. 10 times faster/slower doesn't actually affect the user when we talk about milliseconds. As long as all the browsers are within the same ballpark, then the choice comes down to functionality and philosophy more than raw performance.
truffoo0
on Mar 12, 2009
Must be bored today ... Over the whole 25 sites, IE is 7.32 seconds faster than Firefox and 0.02 seconds faster than Chrome. Taking out the slower sites (most the chinese sites that I'd never visit anyway - leaves 19 sites), the difference is IE is 7.06 seconds faster than FF and 1.82 seconds faster than Chrome. Of course, as I mentioned above, all this is really irrelevant for real use ;-)
DRWAM
on Mar 12, 2009
truffoo0 has a good point. I can only read so fast, so if the page laods fast enough, the rest doesn't matter. This brings Sub's topic, because security will matter more than speed. I really did not find Safari 4 beta much or any faster than version 3. Maybe they're all FOS.
gorath
on Mar 12, 2009
Didn't jobs leave pixar, and then come back again later?
benjwah
on Mar 12, 2009
@Rostov That was awesome. Good call. I'm skeptical of any study done by a company on that company's own products. I know they've been fairly transparent with their methodology, but still, it's not exactly an "independent" study. After 8 years of George Bush, have we not yet been conditioned to be skeptical of what we read?
truffoo0
on Mar 12, 2009
@DRWAM - I think so too ;-) Security and functionality are the real differentiators between browsers. Splitting security out into 2 categories, there is the inherrant security of the browser itself, and the ease of patching/updates. For a company, IE has a hugely simplified patching/update process. Just run a WSUS server and point every computer to it. Then the only issue is to watch out for Zero-Day vulnerabilities. To date, I haven't seen any really good patching/update process from Firefox/Chrome/Safari that can match it. Of course, the number of IE installations creates a big target that continually get's aimed at (and sometimes hit), therefore the update process had better be extremely good. FF seem good at releasing updates but the process itself is painful in a business (someone correct me if I'm wrong). For home users, this is generally a non-issue because everyone runs as admin so can update FF when it automatically prompts to, and IE should update via Automatic Updates.
truffoo0
on Mar 12, 2009
@benjwah Having a transparent methodology is great, and it helps to at least accept the findings within the context of the study (and that they've treated all products fairly). But as I said earlier, any study (and I'm talking non-IT ones as well) only needs to set the context in a certain way to get the results that they want to. It's much the same as statistics are used. Any particular survey can end with desired results based on how you ask the questions or group/interpret the responses. An example, 70% of respondents who were classified as "good citizens" (non-criminals, druggies, etc) were taken camping when they were kids. Therefore, if a govenment legislates that everyone has to go camping, then there will be less crime. Of course, what isn't taken into account is the parental attitude that really affects the kids which also favours camping. Not a good example for the browser performance study, but an example of how you can play with study context and/or results to get the answer you want.
chipwinter
on Mar 12, 2009
The only time when speed is important as a browser feature is when Microsoft is the fastest. All other times, speed doesn't really matter.
truffoo0
on Mar 12, 2009
@chipwinter - If that's true, then why are Apple saying that Safari is whatever times faster than IE? If Apple says it's important, then it must be ;-) I'd actually suggest that other browser makers are more set on performance than Microsoft, hence why Microsoft make the video to show that IE8 is right up there but state that it's not about performance anyway.
truffoo0
on Mar 12, 2009
Interesting new article on WindowsITPro.com regarding browsers: "Exchange 14 Brings Browser Bliss" (InstantDoc #101686). OWA premium on Exchange 14 looks like it'll be supported on IE, Firefox and Safari. About time really (even though I use IE7), but it shows how things are changing.
Lindy
on Mar 13, 2009
@truffoo0 I sat and listened to MS specifically say that Exchange 12 (2007) was going to bring "Browser Bliss" for OWA on non MS browsers...that day never came. Of course they said that Exchange 12 was going to use SQL...finally and of course that did not happen either. Exchange 14 better be a huge improvement over 2007 that is all I got to say.
Dipsh t Admin
on Mar 13, 2009
"Of course they said that Exchange 12 was going to use SQL...finally and of course that did not happen either." They tried it and it failed performance wise. So they didn't pursue it further. Of course, since we are talking about RenderMan and Pixar, we should not forget the products by NewTek, such as Lightwave in 1988 and the Video Toaster in 1990 that set the stage for low cost production exclusively on the Amiga OS.
subzerohitman721
on Mar 13, 2009
@Lindy, The reason why I do not use Firefox or Safari, is that sometimes it doesn't render pages properly. Perhaps part of it is due to the MS IE coding. However, since most operators now are coding for Firefox/Safari, I still from time to time have that issue. I've had a Safari browser 3 that couldn't render Apple.com right. I've had Firefox browsers that have difficulty with email pages. I've had Firefox lockup on machines I was using more so than IE7. IE nails those pages accurately more times than not speaking from my own experiences. However, I do not begrudge you your choice. IE has its pitfalls. I choose to accept them. But I'm very careful where I browse and what I activate within IE. I for one am very glad for both Safari, Firefox, and Chrome. They have served as a check and a balance to Microsoft. This is definitely needed. I'd rather have business along with some government intervention than Microsoft running unchecked with no governemnt intervention.
LynxMukka
on Mar 13, 2009
ROFL, believing that is hilarious. Everyone knows Chrome is now the fastest, with Firefox coming in second. I've had no experience with Safari, but its basically a joke anyway. I have IE8 RC2 and it's still the slowest out of the 3 I have. Sorry but I reckon whoever did that study was getting paid by Microsoft. =/
darkmax
on Mar 13, 2009
You know what?... For those who say speed is not important, try being in the situation where you are trying to beat your soon-to-be ex-wife in transferring out your only accopunt not listed in the pre-nup.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use