Every browser out there is inferior to Firefox in every way possible.
Simply wrong.
The JS benchmark isn't accurate because Chrome has no CPU cap for JS engine. While Firefox CPU cap for a percentage amount * max cpu single core clock speed/core count of resources to be used by the JS engine/browser tabs this is one of the reason its very efficient. This is why Chrome is power hog(not to be confused with more memory bloating).
CPU usage of Chrome is not an issue. It was never one. If it would arise, I can simply (re)nice the process, so that other processes get more CPU time. My CPU is from 2015, yet very rarely is so loaded that I have to think about who gets how much CPU time.
On the other hand, there were several JS heavy websites that took seconds longer to load and were sluggish to interact with due to Firefoxes slow JS engine. Users don't like that.
Firefox on the other hand uses memory based on total system memory available say if you have 8gb it will use less if you compare, the more available system memory it uses, better the responsiveness. Any app that uses more memory and auto scales is automically superior which is exactly what Firefox does.
Memory usage should depend on the workload and not on the memory that is available. Otherwise, it is hard to get predictable results. Such optimizations could be made user tunable though.
Using Waterfox is obselete ever since Firefox started x64 build(multiprocess release?). I hate this concept of people using distro apps like Palemoon, Waterfox etc. This is the very reason Linux is garbage(except for CLI apps).
It's Mozilla's fault for not looking after their Windows users and lagging behind in their releases. Several other Distibutions also had their own Firefox forks because of organizational issues with Mozilla.
Linux is far superior to Windows and OSX in most cases, easier to handle, customize and run.
