Internet Explorer 64 bit (x64) vs. 32 bit (x86)

By | February 25, 2009 | 16 Comments

After posting Firefox 64 bit vs. 32 bit results, it’s time to check how well does Internet Explorer 7 64 bit compete against its less advanced brother, Internet Explorer 7 32 bit (x86).


Less is better

Although rendering test has shown results in favor of Internet Explorer 32 bit, 64 bit version felt slightly faster during the whole web browsing experience. If you don’t really need a flash player, then Internet Explorer 7 x64 would be a much better solution among those two.

[digg-reddit-me]


About (Author Profile)


Vygantas is a former web designer whose projects are used by companies such as AMD, NVIDIA and departed Westood Studios. Being passionate about software, Vygantas began his journalism carrier back in 2007 when he founded FavBrowser.com. Having said that, he is also an adrenaline junkie who enjoys good books, fitness activities and Forex trading.

  • qrexus

    I think that the graphs 2, 4, 5, 7 are no good at all.
    The graphs should (must) be done from zero, because if I take into account only the bar lengths, Rendering Time Test for x64 is more than double than for x86.
    Please do the graphs from 0, not from an intermediate value.
    Thanks,
    Quinn

    • Dave

      Thank you for pointing this out, because after reading the comments on this page I went back and looked at the graphs again and realized that there wasn’t NEAR the differences as I orignally thought there was. I guess I just assumed the graph originated from 0. I didn’t even notice until you pointed it out. Once I realized that the graphs are only showing the tail-end of the data, I got what I came here for. :)

  • bush

    Thanks for the info.

    IMHO the bars are a bit lame. When you look at the graphics, you first get the impression, that x64 is somewhere 3-5 times faster than its counterpart. Where actually it’s 0.000x something :)

    But, really, other than that, a good insight. Thanks again.

  • http://www.favbrowser.com Vygantas Lipskas

    Yes, indeed :-) That’s the way default excel graph works

  • G. Smith

    I’m sorry, but this story is riddled with statistical errors and manipulation. You really might want to redo the performance graphs (starting from zero as the other viewers have also correctly noted), create an identical browser environments and have a baseline figures. Not good, not good at all.

  • Pingback: Browsersphere » Blog Archive » Around the Browsersphere #12

  • Erik

    I think the graphs are just fine. I can see how it might be confusing for those that can’t read, but us literate folks definitely get it. I know some people just like looking at the pictures though, but i don’t believe you should have to cater to that.

    • Dave

      To: Erik

      Actually, being literate has nothing to do with it. Insulting people’s intelligence doesn’t make you appear any smarter, and if it makes you feel better, I pity you.

      Fact is, the people who made their points here obviously CAN read, or they wouldn’t have known there was anything confusing about it.

      My suggestion is that the poster might include a iconic graph that is started from 0 as suggested by many here, and place it above the blown up graphs that were obviously used to show the more detailed data.

      This way even a novice such as myself can look at it quickly and learn what we came here to learn instead of only people who are “literate”.

  • sam

    as previously stated, graphs are dumb and misleading, this article will probably have a net effect of misleading the audience as a whole.

  • Peter

    One sensible, if a little rude, answer here. You can draw blue lines as long as an AOL “waiting to download line”, it does not change the results. Only the difference between the numbers matter. Well, actually, none of it matters. If you have a 64 bit system, use the 64 bit IE, why not it’s free and does, presumably, work slightly better.

  • Patrick Dreier

    Internet Explorer 64-bit Edition Active X elements of Internet Explorer 64-bit Edition are failed. 
    Adobe Downloader existing laters.
    Internet Explorer 32-bit Edition Active X elements are existing.
    Internet Explorer 64-bit Edition are not standard webbrowser.
    Internet Explorer 32-bit Edition is a standard webbrowser.
    old Sun JRE 64-bit Edition are not existing and the Sun Java 32-bit Edition support are finised.
    Sun Java -bit Edition coming later.

  • Patrick Dreier

    Hello!

    The Internet Explorer 64-bit Edition open Windows Update switching Internet Explorer 32-bit Edition.
    I think the Statstik is not complet.
    I think i am not this is a manipulation.
    I think statistical errors  because many points are failed.
                          

  • Patrick Dreier

    Hello!

    Internet Explorer 64-bit Edition and Internet Explorer 32-bit Edition have do not separeted folders for Active X elements.

  • http://cbuisr.wordpress.com cbuisr

    If you’re using the browser to surf the net and to do some online bills then 32 bit is fine. 64 bit would be for the IT geeks (not in a bad way) who is always wanting a better benchmark number despite you can’t really tell the difference attimes.

  • Pingback: Internet Explorer 9 – 64-bit vs. 32-bit – Part 4: Speed - 4sysops

  • Mgcouill

    best i needed

«
»