Perplexity Comet vs Edge Copilot: The AI Browser Showdown for Control and Privacy

Perplexity’s Comet and Microsoft Edge’s Copilot Mode have turned a once‑straightforward choice — which Chromium browser to use — into a strategic decision about how much control you want to delegate to AI. In a matter of months the debate moved from “who renders pages fastest” to “who can safely summarize, decide, and even click for you,” and the fallout touches performance, privacy, enterprise policy, and web economics. Perplexity has just made Comet broadly available and doubled down on agentic automation, while Microsoft is iterating Copilot Mode inside Edge as a cautious, opt‑in productivity layer — two rival visions for the same future of browsing.

Background / Overview​

The browser used to be purely a rendering engine and UI container; now it’s a surface for AI assistants that can read the page, reason across tabs, and in some cases act on your behalf. That change matters because it shifts the browser’s trust model: a browser no longer just displays content — it can extract, synthesize, and submit it across authenticated sites. Both Perplexity’s Comet and Microsoft’s Edge (with Copilot Mode) are built on Chromium and share page‑rendering performance, but they diverge rapidly on control models and default data handling.

• Perplexity Comet: launched as an AI‑first Chromium fork with an integrated Perplexity answer engine and an agentic assistant that can navigate pages, fill forms, run multi‑step automations, and (for paid tiers) run background agents in parallel. In October 2025 Perplexity removed the initial $200/month gate and opened Comet to everyone, while maintaining paid add‑ons for advanced capabilities.
• Microsoft Edge with Copilot Mode: Microsoft added a dedicated, opt‑in Copilot Mode that surfaces an assistant as a central tab/page control. Copilot can read multiple tabs (with permission), synthesize results, and — where allowed — perform clicks and fills while showing visible cues. Microsoft positions this as experimental and controllable via settings and enterprise policies.

Both approaches are products of competing design philosophies: agentic (Comet) aims to do the work for you, while assistant‑first (Edge) focuses on guidance and user‑supervised actions. The choice is not merely cosmetic — it affects the attack surface, telemetry, and who ultimately benefits when an AI reduces a publisher’s pageviews.

---

What Comet and Copilot Actually Do​

Comet: an agent in your browser​

Comet tightly integrates Perplexity’s citation‑first search engine with a sidebar assistant that maintains context across tabs, supports summarized answers with links, and can — when permitted — execute sequences of page interactions. Perplexity added a “background assistant” for paid Max users that runs multiple agents in parallel and presents results in a dashboard, effectively turning the browser into a multi‑tasking agent platform. The free rollout expands availability but keeps advanced automation behind subscription tiers and features like Comet Plus.
Key Comet behaviors:

• Summarize any page and return citations without copy/paste.
• Maintain context between tabs and synthesize multi‑page research.
• Run automated workflows that navigate sites, compare options, and prompt the user before finalizing purchases (paid features).

Edge Copilot Mode: assistant with guardrails​

Edge’s Copilot Mode is experimental and opt‑in. When enabled, Copilot becomes the primary entry point on new tabs and can use context from open tabs to synthesize information. Microsoft emphasizes visibility and control: Copilot shows when it’s reading content, asks for permission before accessing page content, and presents its actions in a watchable sequence so users can interrupt or roll back steps. Microsoft also ties Copilot to the Microsoft 365 ecosystem for productivity scenarios.
Notable Copilot features:

• Tab‑aware summarization and comparisons (with permission).
• Integrated drafting (emails, documents) using Microsoft 365 context when allowed.
• Voice navigation and simple task handoffs, with enterprise policies to limit availability.

---

Performance: What the numbers say (and their caveats)​

Under the hood both Comet and Edge rely on Chromium’s Blink engine, so raw page rendering and compatibility are equivalent. Differences show up in memory and auxiliary features.

• WebXPRT 3 and related HTML5/JS tasks give Edge a small edge in some tests: older WebXPRT runs listed Edge at ~76 and Chrome at ~73 on sample hardware, showing micro‑optimizations by Microsoft’s team. These benchmark numbers come from independent WebXPRT listings and browser test archives; they illustrate marginal differences, not a universal winner. Benchmarks vary with hardware and versions; treat single test runs as indicative, not definitive.
• Memory usage: multiple independent tests and reviews have repeatedly shown Edge being more memory‑efficient than a stock Chrome build, largely due to features like Sleeping Tabs and process management. In field tests and reviewer comparisons Edge has often consumed noticeably less RAM under identical workloads — a potential boon for 8‑GB laptops. That said, browser memory profiles change with releases and installed extensions, and Comet’s own memory footprint depends heavily on whether an agent is actively running in the background.
• Real‑world responsiveness: for 99% of users, both browsers feel fast. Comet offloads heavy AI work to cloud services (or to paid background agents), so regular page loads remain snappy. Edge benefits from Windows optimizations (preloading, Chromium tuning) and often shows slightly better battery and RAM efficiency on Windows hardware.

A quick reality check: microbenchmarks are useful to spot regressions or advantages, but when choosing a browser the bigger questions are AI reliability, feature fit, and privacy tradeoffs — not a 2–5% benchmark delta.

---

Privacy and Data Handling: the essential tradeoffs​

This is where the two products diverge most sharply.

• Microsoft Edge: Copilot’s behavior is opt‑in and permissioned. Microsoft emphasizes that Copilot only accesses page content when you grant it permission to do so, and it provides visual indicators when Copilot is viewing or interacting with page content. Microsoft processes AI queries via its cloud infrastructure (Bing/Microsoft servers) and provides enterprise controls that can keep Copilot data within organizational boundaries when administrators configure it that way. For enterprise deployments, Microsoft offers compliance tooling and data isolation options.
• Perplexity Comet: by default, Comet ties browsing queries to a Perplexity account and routes many AI tasks through Perplexity’s cloud services. Perplexity advertises a “Strict” or “Local Processing Mode” for sensitive tasks, but the default experience conserves context server‑side and can associate queries with user identities. Perplexity promises no sale of personal data to third parties and has rolled out publisher revenue shares (Comet Plus) and account‑level privacy controls, but the aggregate telemetry footprint is larger than a local‑only model. If you link external services (Gmail, calendar) you are explicitly granting the browser access for summarization and action.

Privacy‑first alternatives such as Brave and Firefox make a different trade: they emphasize local models or opt‑in cloud connectivity and store conversations locally or outside traditional vendor clouds. If absolute minimization of cloud telemetry is a priority, a Brave/Firefox approach is more defensible today.
Caveat: Perplexity’s free rollout expanded Comet’s user base rapidly. That increases the magnitude of telemetry and the practical need to audit what actually remains local versus cloud‑processed; users and IT teams should validate current product docs before deploying at scale.

---

Security: the new attack surface for agentic browsing​

Agentic features change classical web security assumptions. Brave’s security researchers produced a detailed demonstration of an indirect prompt‑injection attack against Comet: hidden instructions embedded in a webpage’s content could be interpreted by the assistant as a command, enabling cross‑site actions and potential exfiltration if not mitigated. Brave disclosed the vulnerability to Perplexity and published a write‑up describing the mechanics, the disclosure timeline, and the mitigations Perplexity implemented. The incident is a practical demonstration that giving an AI authority to act — even with user permission steps — multiplies attack vectors and demands new defenses.
Mitigations to watch for:

• Origin‑bound permissions and fine‑grained action scopes (e.g., “read only”, “suggest only”, “perform clicks but never submit payments”).
• Visible audit logs and replayable action history so a user or admin can verify what an agent did.
• HTML or HTTP signals that let a site mark content as “do not parse” for agents (a future spec that could reduce prompt injection risk).
• Enterprise policies to whitelist/blacklist agentic features on managed devices.

Edge’s approach — making Copilot visibly act only with permission and iterating through an experimental opt‑in program — reduces but does not eliminate risk. The real work for vendors is creating standardized, auditable controls and browser‑level safety envelopes that prevent misinterpretation of page content as executable instructions.

---

Extensions, Ecosystem, and Real‑World Workflows​

Because both browsers are Chromium‑based, extension compatibility is excellent: the Chrome Web Store works in Edge and Comet supports most Chrome extensions. That removes a major migration barrier: your ad‑blocker, password manager, and developer tools move with you. Edge adds value with deep Windows and Microsoft 365 integrations (Collections, Office sidebars, native account sync), while Comet ties into Perplexity’s answer engine and connectors for email/calendar/workflows.
Ecosystem implications:

• Edge is embedded in Windows, benefiting from OS optimizations and enterprise management (Group Policy, Intune).
• Comet currently targets desktop (Windows/macOS) and relies on Perplexity’s ecosystem; mobile browser parity is still a work in progress, though Perplexity’s apps supplement the experience.

For users who live inside Microsoft’s ecosystem (Outlook, OneDrive, Teams), Copilot’s integration is an operational win. For users who want a focused AI search + agent experience, Comet’s default Perplexity search and agent tools are compelling — but carry a higher data‑sharing footprint by default.

---

Expert and Industry Takeaways​

Industry commentary paints a consistent picture: the rapid rise of AI in browsers is inevitable, but execution and governance will decide winners.

• Scale and reach favor Microsoft. By embedding Copilot in Edge and Windows, Microsoft can experiment at OS scale while offering enterprise controls; but it must overcome user trust and historical skepticism about data collection.
• Perplexity’s Comet is bold and innovative, demonstrating what an agentic browser feels like; its free rollout is a classic distribution play to accelerate adoption. The startup’s revenue sharing for publishers (Comet Plus) is a pragmatic attempt to address content economics. But agentic automation and aggressive cloud processing intensify privacy and security questions.
• Security researchers and privacy advocates are warning that new attack classes (prompt injections, agent coercion) require browser‑level defenses and probably new web standards. Brave’s disclosure is a wake‑up call: agentic browsing demands new guardrails.

In short: the idea of AI browsing has broad support. The implementation will determine compliance, adoption, and whether publishers, enterprises, and regulators accept these agents as part of the web stack.

---

Practical Guidance: How to Choose and How to Harden​

• If you value productivity and are already invested in Microsoft 365, try Copilot Mode in Edge (opt‑in) and evaluate the enterprise policy controls before enabling on work machines. Use InPrivate for sensitive browsing and audit Copilot’s permission prompts.
• If you want the most agentic experience and are comfortable with cloud processing — or you need the specific Perplexity features (background assistant, multi‑agent workflows) — try Comet, but disable agentic automations until you understand the permission model and enable strict modes for sensitive accounts.
• If privacy is paramount, consider Brave or Firefox with local AI features; they preserve much of the assistant functionality while minimizing cloud telemetry. Brave’s Leo and local inference options are a realistic compromise.
• For IT and security teams:
• Treat agentic features as a new endpoint capability: add them to threat models and EDR policies.
• Enforce policy to restrict agentic automation on corporate devices until you vet DPA/contractual and technical safeguards.
• Monitor for prompt‑injection vectors and insist vendors provide action logs and consent records.

---

Strengths, Weaknesses, and Risks — Side‑by‑Side​

• Strengths
• Comet: powerful agentic automation, Perplexity grounding and citations, rapid product iteration and novel features (background assistant).
• Edge: enterprise controls, Windows integration, visible permissioning and gradual rollout using Copilot Mode.
• Weaknesses
• Comet: larger telemetry footprint by default and known prompt‑injection concerns that require hardened mitigations.
• Edge: conservative rollout may lag Comet’s raw agentic capability, and Microsoft must continuously clarify opt‑in defaults to maintain trust.
• Risks
• Security: agentic actions multiply attack surfaces (prompt injection, malicious instructions embedded in content).
• Privacy: cloud processing of page content and account‑linked telemetry can conflict with enterprise and regulatory requirements unless explicitly managed.

---

A Final Assessment: What to Watch Next​

The AI browser race has moved from speculation to execution. Comet demonstrates the raw possibility of agentic, hands‑free browsing; Edge shows how to bring AI into a mainstream product with enterprise controls. The immediate question for users and admins is not which is “better” in an abstract sense, but which product aligns with their risk tolerance, data governance needs, and workflow habits.
Key watchpoints for the next 6–12 months:

• Standardized safety controls for agentic actions (action logs, origin‑bound permissions).
• Regulatory scrutiny over cloud processing of web content and the economic impact on publishers.
• How Google and Apple respond: we expect Chrome/Safari moves that blend local inference and cloud models to compete on privacy and reach.
• Whether Comet’s revenue‑share and publisher deals scale enough to resolve the “summary vs. click” economics.

This is a defining moment for browsing: the shift to AI‑native interfaces will reshape who owns the first interaction on the web and how actions taken by software are governed. For Windows users and IT professionals, the immediate priority is to pilot conservatively, insist on auditable safety controls, and ask vendors for transparent, verifiable statements on data flows and mitigation measures. The browser wars of the future will be fought less on microbenchmarks and more on trust, policy, and proven safety — and both Comet and Edge are staking out opposing, consequential positions in that battleground.

---

If you want a concise checklist to evaluate Comet or Edge for deployment (permissions to check, policies to lock down, telemetry items to audit), a follow‑up practical guide tailored to enterprise or power users can be provided.

---

Source: ts2.tech AI Browser Showdown: Perplexity Comet vs. Microsoft Edge in 2025