Not the OP making the claim, but I also looked for recent data and couldn't find any (especially for M1 macs because I just switched to one).
So I just compared them myself for my typical work and media playback (Youtube & Twitch), just anecdotal and totally unscientific though, ranked by MacOs's Energy Impact with the best being 100%.
All with the same extensions (if available, for Safari I used adguard instead of ublock origin).
Safari Technlogy Preview: 100%
Brave Beta: 110%
Orion: 300%
Firefox: 1200% :(
While Safari also used slightly less memory, Brave is the best compromise for me for now. (e2ee sync, chrome extensions and with their crypto shenanigans disabled.)
But again, not scientific at all and of course might differ for people depending on the extensions they use and their browsing behavior.
The number for Orion looks wrong (Orion dev here). It should be same or better than Safari as both are using WebKit with Orion being more lightweight. Would be happy to look into this if you can post methodology used at https://orionfeedback.org
I'd expect battery life to be similar (or maybe even better):
> By using your computer’s built-in website rendering engine (the same one Safari uses), and by blocking trackers before they load (unlike all the major browsers), you’ll get really fast browsing.
So I just compared them myself for my typical work and media playback (Youtube & Twitch), just anecdotal and totally unscientific though, ranked by MacOs's Energy Impact with the best being 100%.
All with the same extensions (if available, for Safari I used adguard instead of ublock origin).
Safari Technlogy Preview: 100%
Brave Beta: 110%
Orion: 300%
Firefox: 1200% :(
While Safari also used slightly less memory, Brave is the best compromise for me for now. (e2ee sync, chrome extensions and with their crypto shenanigans disabled.)
But again, not scientific at all and of course might differ for people depending on the extensions they use and their browsing behavior.