Computer Science Canada About FireFox 1.5 |
| Author: | we64 [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | About FireFox 1.5 |
Firefox 1.5 is great, fast and better ad blocker. But I realized a problem with it, the memory usage is far too great. I did a comparison, it takes 34 000 k to open a page that only takes 26 000k for IE and probably less for Opera. Both browsers have one tool bar (firefox has google and IE has msn). Also the CPU usage for Firefox randomly jumps from 0 to 70s just by sitting there doing nothing. While IE takes no CPU usage at all while just sitting there. I dont' remember the older version of Firefox does this, or is it just my own computer problem? |
|
| Author: | Paul [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The problem with IE is, it seems to use more and more memory the longer you use it. I can almost never use IE for anything other than forums for over 3 hours without it crashing on me. |
|
| Author: | Tony [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 4:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
You should also consider the memory usage of 2 IE Windows vs. 2 Firefox tabs. What about 3? I usually have about 8 open. |
|
| Author: | we64 [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 7:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well I just tried 5 tabs vs 5 windows. Firefox takes about 110 mb of both physical memory and virtual memory. IE takes about 112 mb of physical memory and 80 mb of virtual memory. Memory usage is one of firefox's weakness, very inefficient. This is probably why some people change from firefox to Opera. |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 8:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Really? This is what I get: Firefox + 10 tabs of google = 20mb mem usage IE * 10 googles open = 12mb * 10mb = 120mb mem usage So maybe IE would be more memory efficient if you were only using 2 'tabs'. As for VM, FireFox used 12mb, while IE used 4mb * 10 = 40mb. *edit* Apparently, I didn't know what I was talking about... Blah... Firefox = 27mb physical mem IE = 21mb physical mem |
|
| Author: | Paul [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 8:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I too noticed the increase in memory usage in firefox. With many of the games I run being usually meant for computers more modern than mine, i pay attention. Anyway I'm content with opera. |
|
| Author: | Martin [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 8:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Firefox, with a few plugins and four tabs open with: arstechnica, google news, compsci.ca forums index and slashdot.org open - 34,980KB ram. Internet Explorer - 30,964KB ram. My beef with IE is how klunky it is. Not tabs, no mouse gestures, no plugins and strange rendering (plus it puts name effects on compsci.ca, which I hate). I don't remember having any memory leak problems with it though. Whatever though, the overhead is trivial. I have more than 3mb of ram to spare. |
|
| Author: | we64 [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 8:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wow, Gandalf had some amazing and extreme cases. The websites that I opened had many ads and pictures and stuff. Google.com doesn't reflect different aspects of the browser. |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 8:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
we64 wrote: wow, Dan had some amazing and extreme cases. The websites that I opened had many ads and pictures and stuff. Google.com doesn't reflect different aspects of the browser.
Dan? Hmm? Google.com reflects the browser itself better, without taking into consideration the creation of various sites (some are meant for IE/FF or are coded badly). But that can be taken both ways. So, the websites you opened had a lot of ads? Well, since firefox blocks most and IE blocks some that would contribute to Firefox's results. |
|
| Author: | we64 [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 8:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
lol I am sorry, your name was white, so I thought you were Dan, since he is around quite often and I always mess it up. |
|
| Author: | Paul [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 9:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Another awesome feature of opera is, if you click near the bottom/top edge of the browser window, it scrolls that way 
Also, right click a picture, click on "get picture address", I find that invaluable 
Instead IE: right click picture, properties, copy the whole darned thing. |
|
| Author: | Cervantes [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 9:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Paul wrote: Also, right click a picture, click on "get picture address", I find that invaluable
Instead IE: right click picture, properties, copy the whole darned thing. Firefox: right click, Copy Image Location ^^ |
|
| Author: | md [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 9:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Firefox isn't very good with images, that's where it's memory problems are. But memory usage is a highly pointless area of discussion. Unless you have so little memory that you need to use virtual memory to scroll you're good. ** note that I have > 1gb of memory in all my computers so memory usage _really_ doesn't matter to me. |
|
| Author: | we64 [ Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well nowadays memories are cheap, but then if you look at the general specs for mainstream computers in store, the memory isn't that great (about 256 mb to 512 mb) and you have to share 64 to 128 mb with video card for many of them. Paul and me just went to a friend's house and played on their new computer; 2.6 ghz with 256 mb (shared 64 mb with video card) which only makes it 192 mb. This is where memory usage come into play. We couldn't even play Maplestory smooth enough. Also, laptop users are mostly limited with our memory amount. I have 512 mb shared 64 mb with video card, with leaves 448 mb. Most of the time it is enough, but then if a browser turns on with 5 tabs will use up 100 something megs will dramatically slow down the system. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Mon Dec 12, 2005 2:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
we64 wrote: Well nowadays memories are cheap, but then if you look at the general specs for mainstream computers in store, the memory isn't that great (about 256 mb to 512 mb) and you have to share 64 to 128 mb with video card for many of them. Paul and me just went to a friend's house and played on their new computer; 2.6 ghz with 256 mb (shared 64 mb with video card) which only makes it 192 mb. This is where memory usage come into play. We couldn't even play Maplestory smooth enough.
Also, laptop users are mostly limited with our memory amount. I have 512 mb shared 64 mb with video card, with leaves 448 mb. Most of the time it is enough, but then if a browser turns on with 5 tabs will use up 100 something megs will dramatically slow down the system. Then perhaps you should upgrade the memory, or not buy systems with shared memory for graphics. |
|
| Author: | timmytheturtle [ Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Paul wrote: Anyway I'm content with opera.
Go Opera! I only got 192mb of ram in my computer and I'm able to have XMMS, X-Chat, 2-4 tabs open in Opera, BOINC (Linux WCG client), plus the O/S and I only experince slight problems. If you don't like firefox's memory usage, switch browsers |
|
| Author: | we64 [ Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: If you don't like firefox's memory usage, switch browsers
Well the thing about Opera is that it doesn't have ads blocker, which is annoying if you have been using firefox for a long time. I am too used with no worring about ads with firefox. It is hard to switch now. |
|
| Author: | timmytheturtle [ Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
we64 wrote: Quote: If you don't like firefox's memory usage, switch browsers
Well the thing about Opera is that it doesn't have ads blocker It may not have the plugin Ad Blocker, but it has a built in ad blocker |
|
| Author: | codemage [ Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just for comparison, Opera uses about 24M RAM for me while I'm using it. It hardly goes up at all with multiple tabs open. (Usually 5-10ish, but occasionally into the 30's...) |
|
| Author: | we64 [ Tue Dec 13, 2005 6:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
codemage wrote: Just for comparison,
Opera uses about 24M RAM for me while I'm using it. It hardly goes up at all with multiple tabs open. (Usually 5-10ish, but occasionally into the 30's...) Wow, that is impressive. I see why there are still tons of fans of Opera after all these years. |
|
| Author: | Paul [ Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
And it has voice control
"Calculus" leads me to burn's page lol |
|
| Author: | timmytheturtle [ Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Paul wrote: And it has voice control
"Calculus" leads me to burn's page lol I've never used voice control (no mic). How well does it work? |
|