Safari Trails Edge Prototype by 28.6% on iOS Speed Test

What You Need to Know
- Microsoft’s Blink-based iOS browser prototype outperformed Safari by 28.6% on Speedometer 3.1 performance test.
- Apple’s BrowserEngineKit framework enabled alternative browser engines on iOS following EU’s Digital Markets Act requirement in March 2024.
- No browser maker has shipped non-WebKit engine on iOS despite BrowserEngineKit availability due to technical barriers and separate app publication requirement.
Microsoft’s own benchmark tests show a Blink-based prototype browser running on iOS outperformed Safari by 28.6% on Apple’s Speedometer 3.1 performance test. The numbers come from Kyle Pflug, group product manager for the Microsoft Edge Web Platform, who ran the comparison on his own device rather than under controlled lab conditions, and described the work explicitly as a research prototype with preliminary results.
The prototype was built using Apple’s BrowserEngineKit framework, the mechanism Apple introduced to comply with the EU’s Digital Markets Act. That regulation, which took effect in March 2024, required Apple to allow alternative browser engines on iOS for the first time in the platform’s history. Before that, every browser on iPhone, regardless of the name on the icon, was legally required to use WebKit under Apple’s App Store rules.
The Edge prototype’s advantage extended across three benchmarks:
- Speedometer 3.1: 49.27 (Edge prototype) vs. 38.3 (Safari), a 28.6% gap
- JetStream 3 JavaScript: 306.35 vs. 270.9, a 13.1% difference
- MotionMark 1.3.1 graphics rendering: 4,773.52 vs. 4,673.68, a 2.1% margin
Why no alternative engine has shipped yet
More than two years after BrowserEngineKit became available, no browser maker has actually shipped a non-WebKit engine on iOS. Companies point to technical barriers and a requirement that any alternative-engine browser be published as an entirely separate app, distinct from their existing WebKit versions. That friction has been enough to keep the market effectively unchanged.
Open Web Advocacy, responding to Pflug’s results, described the performance gap as a 17-year cost to consumers and called on the European Commission to open a specification proceeding directing Apple precisely how to remove those remaining barriers. The group argued that controlling which engines can run on iOS gives Apple leverage over what the mobile web can do, keeping developers dependent on native apps and App Store distribution. Apple has shown a pattern of using regulatory compliance as a floor rather than a ceiling when it comes to opening its platforms.
0 Comments