I remember years ago when Firefox Quantum boasted of lofty performance improvements only to get pummelled in just about every benchmark against Chrome. I still check out Phoronix's benchmarks now and again and Firefox is consistently behind. Make whatever excuses you will, but the numbers don't lie.
I'll gladly suffer a little bit worse rendering performance and have images resized with good rescaling filters than the blurry pixelated mess that Chrome renders whenever the zoom isn't exactly 100%. It's easy to do well on benchmarks when you sacrifice rendering quality.
And of course there's no way to even ask Chrome to render images with a decent resampling filter...
I use highly interactive websites, like bitcoin exchanges.
They work terribly in Firefox. I don't know if it's because Firefox is slow, or if because devs don't test in Firefox. Either way, even if Firefox is my main browser, I learned that I need to use these sites only in Chrome.
YouTube and most other video sites also are very slow in Firefox and many times the other sites don't work at all, video doesn't start, ...
This came up a few days ago as well, I and many other people have zero problems with YouTube on Firefox. So dunno why some people report that it's atrociously slow.
I'm not sure if benchmarks reflect real-world performance with adblockers and other extensions installed. I've been using FF (nightly) as my daily driver on Linux and Mac for years and I don't see any perceptible difference in page loading times compared to Chrome. The only area where I find Chrome noticeably faster is in starting the application itself, but since I rarely close the browser this is not something I see often.
Unfortunately corporates seem to be ignoring Firefox entirely - last 2 companies I worked at, their webapp worked only in Chrome. So I'm forced to use Chrome (or Chrome-ish browsers like Brave) also on a daily basis.
