Talk:List of web browser performance tests

There are many serious problems with this article:

• No inline citations
• No mention of testing the speed of browsers at loading pages or starting up
• The page states that Acid3 does not test speed, but it does

It looks like this page is one person's opinion about what browser speed tests are, and it contains many obvious inaccuracies. Perhaps the page should be scrapped? Or can it be salvaged? -- Schapel (talk) 13:46, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

1. This page should more accurately be called "Browser performance test" or "Web browser performance benchmarks".
2. Acid3 does have a performance component, as you've noted.
3. None of the platform-specific tests are in fact platform-specific, and can be used in any capable browser. There's an unnecessary distinction here between benchmarks created by browser vendors and those created by third parties.
4. No mention of Dromaeo.

--Gyrobo (talk) 19:32, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Article says "During Developer Summit in June 2012, Microsoft demonstrated Internet Explorer Mobile 10 out-performing the Galaxy S III, HTC One S, and iPhone 4S on iOS 6 Beta." - which apparently is taken directly from a *slide* in referenced link. The comparison makes no sense: it doesn't mention what device or even CPU MSIE ran on and looks more like marketing than fact, which has no place on Wikipedia. (as of 28 June 2012)

I agree. I removed the comparison of a browser (on unspecified phone) to phone models (with unspecified browsers) with a non WP:RS / primary per talk page concerns - presumably the stock browsers but without being explicit this is bogus. This is also outdated with Chrome available on Android, so the comparison is more of a (unspecified phone/unspecified browser) comparison which is bogus in itself, but more so on a browser speed test article. I saved here:

" During Developer Summit in June 2012, Microsoft demonstrated Internet Explorer Mobile 10 out-performing the Galaxy S III, HTC One S, and iPhone 4S on iOS 6 Beta.^[1]" Widefox; talk 12:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Last sentence of first paragraph makes no sense. Turkeyphan^t 22:29, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Note that Sunspider and Peacekeeper have been deprecated and are now unsupported.

• The Sunspider page tells you to use JetStream instead.
• The Peacekeeper page just tells you that it is now unsupported.
• I didn't even bother to check to see if any of the other benchmarks were still active.

Bradknowles (talk) 22:05, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I really think that sentences like "This browser in july 2011 performed 1.7 times better than that other browser" should be removed from the text of ALL the page. This is either a generic page on the methodology and algorithms used for testing, so no results at all should be included, or it could become a place where the scoring of all different browsers for the various tests are listed (and that's a too heavy work to do, in my opinion), but "this is better than that" is really just SPAM! I removed them myself (one on Chrome and one on ie10).

--Francesco

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Browser speed test. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110514205704/http://test262.ecmascript.org/ to http://test262.ecmascript.org/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C368182%2C00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. Per MOS:LAYOUTEL.

Hello. I am proposing the addition of a short amount of text about the WebXPRT benchmark at the bottom of the General tests section, below the Basemark Web 3.0 entry.

COI disclosure: I am an employee of Principled Technologies, the company that distributes WebXPRT (which is free to use and contains no ads or paid add-ons). This information is straightforward, I don’t anticipate it being controversial, and it would provide useful information for readers interested in the subject. Below, I included the proposed addition, and below that, more general information about the test for your reference. Thanks for your time.

Nathanielduke33 (talk) 22:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)Nathanielduke33

Addition of BandwidthPlace.com looks like misdirected spam – service is internet speed test, it is not browser speed test. But I will let someone more experienced with this page to check it. Adam Hauner (talk) 15:40, 16 June 2022 (UTC)