This might not be the case one every machine, I don't know, but it's been consistently true for my usage, it just doesn't feel right.
Unlike the new Opera I might add, it provides a really great experience. The fact that you can now install chrome plugins did it for me as I was a vimium addict. I think the move to blink was the right move for them.
Performance (aka throughput) measures the total duration of operations, e.g. how long does it take to display a page once it is loaded, how fast a script will be executed, etc. When Chrome was introduced, its performance was much greater than Firefox, largely due to v8. Some other factors involved were add-ons (it used to be really easy to write Firefox add-ons that kill performance, and it used to be impossible in Chrome), or old bloated profiles (which of course didn't exist in Chrome). Now, after lots of hard work, the Mozilla community has managed to make Firefox faster than Chrome. That's what is measured by benchmarks, and that's one point for Firefox. Simultaneously (and this doesn't appear in benchmarks) the Chrome add-on and profile situation have started to show the same weaknesses as Firefox'.
Reactivity (aka snappiness) measures how fast an application appears to be, i.e. the total duration of user-visible pauses, e.g. how long does it take to switch between tabs, or how much one tab eating all CPU affects other tabs. When Chrome was introduced, its reactivity was also much greater than Firefox, largely due to the multi-process architecture. Some other factors involved were add-ons, once again, or old bloated profile, or simply the fact that the Mozilla culture initially didn't take into account this factor. It took some time for the Mozilla community to realize that reactivity was just as important as speed. After lots of hard work, the Mozilla community has managed to make Firefox... well, much better than it used to be. Improvements include off main thread rendering, off main thread disk I/O, asynchronous add-ons, etc. Unfortunately, desktop Firefox does not have multi-process architecture yet. This gives a considerable advantage to Chrome in this domain.
Work is ongoing to bring this multi-process architecture to Firefox desktop. The task is long and difficult and might, unfortunately, kill a number add-ons, but I am confident that the Mozilla community will achieve it.
Incidentally, FirefoxOS has a multi-process architecture already.
Caveat: I'm a Mozillian, and I'm involved in Reactivity work in Firefox.
But yes, both features are rather hardcore. We are working on more user-friendly solutions, too, although I have no idea of the roadmap.
I personally hate Chrome for creating a process per tab. It adds a little bit of security, but it makes harder to manage the processes in a system.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/smoothwheel/?...
Of course, if you're happy with Safari, by all means stick with it.