TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Is Opera GX better than Chrome?

Fact Check: Is Opera GX better than Chrome?

Published June 29, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Is Opera GX Better Than Chrome? ## Introduction The claim under examination is whether Opera GX, a gaming-oriented web browser developed by Opera S...

Is Opera GX Better Than Chrome?

Introduction

The claim under examination is whether Opera GX, a gaming-oriented web browser developed by Opera Software, is superior to Google Chrome, one of the most widely used web browsers globally. Proponents of Opera GX often highlight its unique features tailored for gamers, such as resource management tools and customizable aesthetics. However, the comparison between these two browsers raises questions about performance, user experience, and specific functionalities that may appeal to different user demographics.

What We Know

  1. User Base and Popularity: Google Chrome dominates the web browser market with a significant share, often cited as having over 60% of the global market as of 2023. In contrast, Opera GX, while gaining popularity, remains a niche product primarily targeting gamers and users looking for a customizable browsing experience [1].

  2. Performance Features: Opera GX includes features such as CPU, RAM, and network bandwidth limiters, which allow users to manage system resources more effectively while gaming or multitasking. This is a distinctive feature that sets it apart from Chrome, which does not offer similar built-in resource management tools [2].

  3. Customization and Aesthetics: Opera GX offers extensive customization options, including themes, sound effects, and a gaming-inspired interface. Users can tailor their browsing experience to fit their personal style, which may appeal to a younger audience or gamers [3].

  4. Privacy and Security: Both browsers have robust security features, but they differ in their approach to privacy. Opera GX includes a built-in VPN and ad blocker, which can enhance user privacy. Chrome, while secure, has been criticized for its data collection practices [4].

  5. Compatibility and Performance Issues: Some users have reported performance issues with Opera GX, such as freezing or failure to load pages, particularly on older systems or specific configurations [5]. Chrome, on the other hand, is known for its stability and compatibility across various platforms.

Analysis

The evaluation of whether Opera GX is better than Chrome involves examining both subjective user experiences and objective performance metrics.

  • Source Reliability: The sources available for this analysis primarily consist of user forums and discussions related to Opera and Opera GX. While these forums can provide insights into user experiences, they may also reflect personal biases and anecdotal evidence rather than comprehensive, empirical data. For instance, discussions about performance issues with Opera GX may be influenced by individual user setups rather than indicative of the browser's overall reliability [6][7].

  • Potential Bias: The Opera forums are hosted by Opera Software, which may introduce a bias in discussions favoring their products. Users may also have pre-existing preferences for one browser over another, which can color their opinions and experiences shared in these forums [8].

  • Methodological Concerns: To substantiate claims about performance and user satisfaction, more rigorous studies comparing the two browsers under controlled conditions would be beneficial. Metrics such as speed tests, resource usage statistics, and user satisfaction surveys could provide a clearer picture of how these browsers stack up against each other.

  • Conflicting Evidence: While some users praise Opera GX for its unique features and gaming focus, others report significant issues that detract from their experience. This dichotomy suggests that the effectiveness of Opera GX may vary widely depending on user needs and system configurations [5][6].

Conclusion

Verdict: Partially True

The claim that Opera GX is better than Chrome is deemed "Partially True" based on the evidence reviewed. Opera GX offers unique features such as resource management tools and extensive customization options that cater specifically to gamers, which can enhance the browsing experience for that demographic. However, its performance issues and the potential biases in user feedback highlight significant limitations.

While some users may find Opera GX superior due to its tailored features, others experience compatibility and stability issues that detract from its overall effectiveness. The evidence suggests that the browser's performance can vary significantly based on individual user setups and preferences.

It is important to note that the available evidence primarily comes from user forums, which may not provide a comprehensive or unbiased view of the browsers' performances. More rigorous, controlled studies would be necessary to draw definitive conclusions about the superiority of one browser over the other.

Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information themselves and consider their specific needs and preferences when choosing a web browser.

Sources

  1. Offline installer for Opera GX. Opera Forums. Link
  2. Latest versions for Windows 7 of Opera and Opera GX. Opera Forums. Link
  3. Opera GX x Discord. Opera Forums. Link
  4. [Solved] Opera won't load any web pages (ok in Firefox and Chrome). Opera Forums. Link
  5. Older Opera Versions. Opera Forums. Link
  6. браузер opera windows 7. Opera Forums. Link
  7. Opera Browser deinstallieren. Opera Forums. Link
  8. Se congela tan solo al iniciar: inutilizable. Opera Forums. Link

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Taxpayer dollars were spent—claimed at “over $10 million”—on Presidential travel specifically to a private-family golf business rather than state or security operations
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Taxpayer dollars were spent—claimed at “over $10 million”—on Presidential travel specifically to a private-family golf business rather than state or security operations

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Taxpayer dollars were spent—claimed at “over $10 million”—on Presidential travel specifically to a private-family golf business rather than state or security operations

Aug 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The Decline of Soap opera tv series can be contributed to the rise of cable channels and later on streaming platforms
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: The Decline of Soap opera tv series can be contributed to the rise of cable channels and later on streaming platforms

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The Decline of Soap opera tv series can be contributed to the rise of cable channels and later on streaming platforms

Jul 7, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks