Post your Peacekeeper scores here....

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by wobegong, Jun 17, 2013.

  1. wobegong Guest

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    #1
    http://peacekeeper.futuremark.com/

    Stumbled across this browser benchmark test last night and thought it might be interesting to run it against all the current PPC browsers on a single machine to see any differences.

    This should be to show how different browsers perform on the SAME hardware so multiple browser scores for one machine would be useful (the objective is no 'who can get the highest' but rather which browser for each model of mac gets the highest score)

    I know browsing is subjective and a benchmark tool is not necessarily aligned to the specific browsing requirements of an individual but may show up some interesting items.

    Will screenshot my scores on the G5 tonight, aiming to run this against CURRENT (ie. 'active' developed) browsers, eg.

    Aurorafox, TFF, Roccat, Webkit, iCab...
     
  2. MrPilot macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    #2
    just don't try using seamonkey 1.8, it will crawl to a stand still during the tests.

    It was the worst (by far) browser with 180 points or so.

    The only thing that was less than perfect on webkit for leopard was the lack of webm and theora codecs. Else it would have had about 400. Now had to settle with 385.

    The highest scoring browser for me and my setup was nightly of aurorafox with 396 or something points. Really it was noticeably SLOWER on everything than webkit but because of webm support it got a slightly higher value at the end.

    Roccat 3.3 was poor in performance, stability and rendering and scored second worst after seamonkey... (I was surpriced actually, thought roccat was faster than that)

    fluid wasn't that great either, sluggish html5 performance and poorly implemented too.
    stainless was rather good with slightly lower performance than webkit for leopard.

    I suppose webkit for leopard is by far the best performing browser for me. Will stick with it.
     
  3. wobegong thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    #3
    The Results are....

    Interesting results in that all the Webkit based browsers faired pretty poorly compared to the Gecko ones (TFF & Aurora) by quite a wide margin.. All tests run on the PM G5 in my sig.

    In 1st Place TenFourFox 21 but only 4/7 HTML5 tests passed

    [​IMG]


    2nd Place goes to Aurora 20
    but with an impressive 6/7 HTML tests passed.

    [​IMG]

    Far behind Aurora in 3rd is Opera (not current I know but was curious as it uses its own engine) with a miserable 2/7 HTML5 tests passed.

    [​IMG]

    4th Place Webkit 5/7 HTML5

    [​IMG]

    5th Place iCab 5/7 HTML 5

    [​IMG]

    6th Place Roccat (Surprise for me) 5/7 HTML5

    [​IMG]

    Last was Omniweb which although the only browser to complete the contrast manipulation test then promptly crashed(!) so no screenshot even for this.

    All engine versions etc are on the screenshots but suffice to say I used the very latest (unstable in some cases) versions (TFF 21, Aurora 20, Webkit nightly etc.)

    Looks like I'm back to TFF....
     
  4. runeapple, Jun 18, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2013

    runeapple macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    #4
    I wouldn't recommend choosing your browser choice on the peacekeeper test - I don't think it represents speed one bit - I have found that the score seems to vary considerably based on current Internet speeds - further more if I change user agents the scores vary hugely - suggesting that scores are not accurate, it appears it's making some judgement from it's useragent which isn't good.

    FYI I am finding scores of around 900 for both Gecko and Webkit browsers - I am using Leopard Webkit for my Webkit browsers such as Roccat and iCab and I have fibre optic internet 30mb/s

    I am finding Roccat getting highest webkit results and TFF getting highest Gecko result however both received 928 for me. iCab got 922, Aurora 923 - Omniweb crashed for me also. Webkit on its own got 926 so not far behind.

    EDIT: Just downloaded Sea Monkey and that got 781 lol.

    There must be more accurate tests online?
     
  5. wobegong thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    #5
    I agree but it is an indication on the areas it covers. Which CPU do you have? If a quad then I guess this shows the browsers are multi threaded.

    In fact I will probably stick with WebKit (which is what I was using before Roccat), its an up to date engine and most important of all every single website so far works fine. I liked Roccat but the old engine is giving me security concerns, all I want is a browser I can feel somewhat secure using and which opens every site, I really don't want multiple switching between them depending which site I'm visiting..
     
  6. runeapple macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    #6
    You do realise you can replace the systems webkit with the up-to-date leopard webkit - this means you can have an actively developed browser A.K.A Roccat using an up-to-date engine A.K.A Leopard Webkit. Best of both worlds and trust me it is super fast - the peacekeeper test doesn't do it justice. Deffo worth giving it a go - it was a while ago since I set mine up - I am sure I can find instructions somewhere.

    Check out: http://code.google.com/p/leopard-webkit/
     
  7. MrPilot macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    #7
    roccat was giving me 20-30 frames per second on that airplane shoot-em up test while webkit for leopard gave me around 50....

    Aren't both using the same frameworks? This is odd indeed.

    Gecko based frameworks gave me 30 ish frames per second
     
  8. runeapple macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    #8
    Like I said don't take it literally - the accuracy of the test seems very shady.
     
  9. ihuman:D macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Location:
    Ireland
    #9
    You have to run the scripts that came with the Leopard Webkit download to set it as the default Webkit rendering engine.
     
  10. MrPilot macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    #10
    yes, it seems so. :(

    ----------

    What will that enable? What will benefit? I know there's a script that allows webkit for leopard be your favorite /default browser... but I suppose I must have been confused about that scripts use... lol
     
  11. wobegong thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    #11
    Roccat actually doesn't use the webkit system install, I thought it would as well (which is why I installed the Webkit into the system) but if you look at the webkit versions reported on the Peacekeeper test you will see it is different to the one reported by the Webkit Browser. After much trial and error I am settling on the Webkit Browser - both Roccat and Webkit remain the only browsers that allow me to go to any site at all without problems but as Webkit has a more up to date engine I'll stick with that for now whilst keeping an eye out for Roccat updates.
     
  12. ihuman:D macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Location:
    Ireland
    #12
    It means that any web browser that embeds the system Webkit will be re-directed to use the newer Webkit version of Webkit that was installed with Leopard Webkit.
     
  13. MrPilot macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    #13
    oh, ok! I wasn't sure about the wording there on the install notes for leopard, but what you said makes sense. Question is though if other browsers bypass system webkit for other back-ends....
     
  14. runeapple macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    #14
    On mine it is the same - are you sure you have installed leopard webkit correctly using the script?
     
  15. wobegong thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    #15
    Hmm, well I installed the script (since removed again)..will take another look.
     
  16. runeapple macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    #16
    FYI an email from Runecats Support:

     
  17. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #17
    Tried testing my browser of choice on my eMac, Sunrise 1.8.5. It fails all the codec tests, and promptly freezes everytime when reaching the dual image manipulation test.

    ...Well then. :eek:
     
  18. Lil Chillbil macrumors 65816

    Lil Chillbil

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #18
    Here it is on my 10.9 mavericks hackintosh,

    DISCLAIMER!!!

    YES i KNOW THIS IS NOT POWERPC BASED I JUST WANTED TO LEND A WEE BIT OF CONTRAST TO SEE HOW THEY STACK UP AGAINST MODERN PROFESSIONAL MACS.
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page