Chrome Apps
Pages: 12
So, I finally made the move from Firefox to Chrome. I was pretty tired of the memory leaking of Firefox. It was almost always taking up 300MB + memory. Anywho, what all apps do you guys have? I already have adblock, Wolfram Alpha, and the weather channel of course.
So you just moved to Google Chrome and the first thing you did was download two toolbars and an ad-blocker... I think I know why Firefox was taking up 300MB+ of RAM.
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
+1 Computergeek01
From what I've seen, modern versions of Firefox don't use any more memory than Chrome. Chrome just sandboxes everything into separate processes, but add em all up it's more or less the same depending on the context.
From what I've seen, modern versions of Firefox don't use any more memory than Chrome. Chrome just sandboxes everything into separate processes, but add em all up it's more or less the same depending on the context.
I don't know whether it has improved but historically, Firefox has been awful in terms of memory leaks.
Also I don't understand how Firefox 4.0 seems like a recent release yet 10.0 is the current release. They've released 6 major versions in less than a year?
Also I don't understand how Firefox 4.0 seems like a recent release yet 10.0 is the current release. They've released 6 major versions in less than a year?
| two toolbars and an ad-blocker... |
Actually, adblockers can greatly reduce memory usage (especially when they keep Flash advertisements from being loaded).
| They've released 6 major versions in less than a year? |
Yes. Chrome has released 8 major versions in the last year, so...
And if you're looking to avoid memory leaks, you probably selected the wrong browser.
Firefox might use a lot of memory (especially if you've been using the same profile for many years and don't limit your history), but it definitely does not leak. When I start Firefox, it uses about 1.0 GB right after all tabs are loaded (about 150-200 of them), then quickly raises to 1.5 GB and stays there. Even days later.
Edit: this seems to have improved recently, though. I'm down to ~900 MB with FF10.
On the other hand, Chrome sometimes uses >2 GB after just a few hours (with only 2-3 tabs open, mind you).
That looks more like a memory leak to me.
But if you want performance, Chrome wins in nearly every aspect.
Last edited on
I actually had nothing but adblock on my Firefox, and chrome is still out performing it with more addons. I did notice chrome splits up into several processes, so I'm not really sure the average memory usage yet. But on firefox, I had it set up to not save history or passwords, I ran ccleaner everyday to clear out temp files and cookies and all that, and never had more than 5 tabs open at once, and still used 300+ MB.
@Athar,
Interesting. However, even if it doesn't leak now, it certainly has in past versions (I've observed it happening). Having said that, I'm pretty sure I've observed Chrome leaking as well.
p.s. What the hell do you need 200 tabs for? I feel cluttered with any more than 15, and I normally sit at about eight.
Interesting. However, even if it doesn't leak now, it certainly has in past versions (I've observed it happening). Having said that, I'm pretty sure I've observed Chrome leaking as well.
p.s. What the hell do you need 200 tabs for? I feel cluttered with any more than 15, and I normally sit at about eight.
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
| But if you want performance, Chrome wins in nearly every aspect. |
Not really, they are about equal, depending on who's benchmarking it.
Well, most of the tabs serve as reminders - pages/articles that I need to read, topics to research, information about libraries I want to try, bug reports I need to deal with or some other task I need to complete.
And occasionally, the less important things tend to pile up.
And occasionally, the less important things tend to pile up.
Sure, I use bookmarks when I decide that I won't deal with something anytime soon.
But for the rest, the open tabs loading every browser start do a good job of reminding me of what's left to do.
Hm well, when I'm benchmarking it, Chrome easily wins.
Some items:
Generating a table with ~14000 rows from a large array using JavaScript:
Firefox: 7 seconds
Chrome: 2 seconds
Loading and displaying a site with ~50 relatively small images from a local HTTP server:
Firefox: 0.5-1.5 seconds
Chrome: ~0.1 second
Google Maps:
Firefox: ...let's not talk about it. It's awful.
Chrome: zooming is perfectly smooth.
Not sure what other people are benchmarking, but Chrome is usually faster where it matters.
But for the rest, the open tabs loading every browser start do a good job of reminding me of what's left to do.
| Not really, they are about equal, depending on who's benchmarking it. |
Hm well, when I'm benchmarking it, Chrome easily wins.
Some items:
Generating a table with ~14000 rows from a large array using JavaScript:
Firefox: 7 seconds
Chrome: 2 seconds
Loading and displaying a site with ~50 relatively small images from a local HTTP server:
Firefox: 0.5-1.5 seconds
Chrome: ~0.1 second
Google Maps:
Firefox: ...let's not talk about it. It's awful.
Chrome: zooming is perfectly smooth.
Not sure what other people are benchmarking, but Chrome is usually faster where it matters.
Last edited on
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
Google Maps works fine for me with Firefox 10.
What's your benchmarking software? Or are you just using a stopwatch.
Doing some random thing I just made up:
Firefox: 0.0001 seconds
Chrome: 10000 seconds
I can make stuff up too ;)
What's your benchmarking software? Or are you just using a stopwatch.
Doing some random thing I just made up:
Firefox: 0.0001 seconds
Chrome: 10000 seconds
I can make stuff up too ;)
| Or are you just using a stopwatch. |
Yes, it's sufficient. Sure, it wouldn't be accurate enough if we were talking about differences within the range of a few percent, but that is clearly not the case.
| Google Maps works fine for me with Firefox 10. |
Hardware acceleration doesn't work for me in Firefox, which might make a difference.
But regardless, hardware acceleration isn't enabled in Chrome either.
Not really, they are about equal, depending on who's benchmarking it. |
I don't need benchmarks to visually see Chrome does everything much, much faster.
Startup - immediate (in Firefox, always 1-2 seconds of waiting).
Page loading - visibly faster for more complex pages, e.g. portals
Back button - immediate
GMail - works fluently now
Memory usage - I don't care, I have 8 GBs.
| Memory usage - I don't care, I have 8 GBs. |
This. Everyone likes to complain about Firefox's memory usage, but unless you actually look at it in task manager, you'd never notice... so what's the big deal?
That said, last time I used Chrome, a good 8% of websites I went to were broken in it and it wasn't noticably faster than Firefox, so I switched back to FF relatively quick. Unless it's made some major breakthroughs in a more recent version I'm not interested.
EDIT: toned down my percentage a bit.
Last edited on
closed account (1yR4jE8b)
I've also noticed that page compatiblity is substantially better in Firefox, something that is leagues more important to me than batch loading images 0.4 seconds faster. Firefox addons are also substantially better than Chrome ones because Chrome restricts the API and Mozilla keeps everything open. Adblock is a shining example, on Firefox it's flawless and on Chrome it barely works because Chrome restricts what elements can and can't be inspected. I haven't seen any text/video ads or popups in years, unless I open Chrome.
http://techsplurge.com/7294/firefox-10-brings-massive-performance-improve-firefox-9-inches-closer-chrome/
I'll take these performance benchmarks over fanboy heresay on some programming forum. Show me modern benchmarks that say anything other than "Firefox is faster at some things, and Chrome is Faster at other things but overall they are more or less identical performance wise". You can't, because they don't exist.
Imagine that, Chrome isn't significantly better than Firefox at any benchmark *except* Google's tailor-made-for-chrome-only V8 software...you don't say! Everything else, they are either so close it's irrelevant or Firefox smokes it.
http://techsplurge.com/7294/firefox-10-brings-massive-performance-improve-firefox-9-inches-closer-chrome/
I'll take these performance benchmarks over fanboy heresay on some programming forum. Show me modern benchmarks that say anything other than "Firefox is faster at some things, and Chrome is Faster at other things but overall they are more or less identical performance wise". You can't, because they don't exist.
Imagine that, Chrome isn't significantly better than Firefox at any benchmark *except* Google's tailor-made-for-chrome-only V8 software...you don't say! Everything else, they are either so close it's irrelevant or Firefox smokes it.
Really, one of the only reasons I'm using Chrome and not Firefox is because Chrome is a multi-process application, giving it just that extra bit of "sandboxing" as it was called earlier.
I too don't care an awful lot about memory usage when I too have 8 GB, half of which is only rarely used. :)
-Albatross
I too don't care an awful lot about memory usage when I too have 8 GB, half of which is only rarely used. :)
-Albatross
Pages: 12