1 - what are all the computer specs needed for chrome with 100-1000+ tabs to run smoothly?

[KirbysHammer]

1 - what are all the computer specs needed for chrome with 100-1000+ tabs to run smoothly?

Hang on...I thought you had decided on a laptop?
http/www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-3490946/gettign-highest-rated-parts-amazon-lowest-cost-highest-rated-laptop.html

So...1,000 tabs open in a browser on a laptop size screen is...absolutely unmanageable.

A couple of years ago, some other member thought he needed some stupidly large number of browser tabs open.
On a lark, I decided to see just how many would open, with actual content, and not kill the PC.

At the time....i5-3570k, 16GB RAM, Win 8.1 Pro.
I got up to 'a few hundred' (300?), and the system slowed down to the point of unusability. Never actually crashed, but slooooow.
And of course, finding any particular tab was totally impossible. A needle in a haystack.

Chances are you ran out of RAM... or was the CPU pegged?

Yeah I don't know why OP wants so many tabs other than to brag to their friends.

I personally never go above 50 tops and I do cleanup every day, which takes 30 seconds.

 

[USAFRet]

Chances are you ran out of RAM... or was the CPU pegged?

Yeah I don't know why OP wants so many tabs other than to brag to their friends.

I personally never go above 50 tops and I do cleanup every day, which takes 30 seconds.

I can't remember the exact limiting part...RAM or CPU. It was a few years ago.

If I feel lazy later, I may try it again with a somewhat stronger system.

 

[USAFRet]

OK, so I tried it.
Specs:
i7 4790k, stock speed
32GB DDR3 RAM
500GB SSD
Win 10 Pro
FireFox 55.0.2 32bit

I have my FF browser set to open with 7 default tabs. 1 local HTML file, and 6 x from elsewhere on the www.
Middle click on the Home button opens a new 7 tabs of the same content. Repeat 19x in each browser instance.

3 FF browser windows
#1 - (this one), 13 tabs open
#2 - 7 x 20 iterations = 140 tabs
#3 - 7 x 20 iterations = 140 tabs

So....just shy of 300 open tabs.
One of the tabs on the original FF instance crashed. Recoverable.
Approx 3 minutes before all the spinners on the individual tabs stopped spinning.
CPU use never went over 10%
RAM usage topped out at 8.1GB. Currently idling at 6.5GB with all 293 tabs still open.

Issues:
This is not a real test, because this is opening the same URL's over and over. All the images and data is already cached and in the temp file.
If this were 300 individual tabs with discreet content, I'd expect issues much earlier.

Of course, access and workflow is completely out the window. What data, what site, is on what tab? NFC.
Totally useless.

So....computerbroken....what is your workflow that demands 1,000+ tabs open?
Or are you just joking around?

 

[KirbysHammer]

OK, so I tried it.
Specs:
i7 4790k, stock speed
32GB DDR3 RAM
500GB SSD
Win 10 Pro
FireFox 55.0.2 32bit

I have my FF browser set to open with 7 default tabs. 1 local HTML file, and 6 x from elsewhere on the www.
Middle click on the Home button opens a new 7 tabs of the same content. Repeat 19x in each browser instance.

3 FF browser windows
#1 - (this one), 13 tabs open
#2 - 7 x 20 iterations = 140 tabs
#3 - 7 x 20 iterations = 140 tabs

So....just shy of 300 open tabs.
One of the tabs on the original FF instance crashed. Recoverable.
Approx 3 minutes before all the spinners on the individual tabs stopped spinning.
CPU use never went over 10%
RAM usage topped out at 8.1GB. Currently idling at 6.5GB with all 293 tabs still open.

Issues:
This is not a real test, because this is opening the same URL's over and over. All the images and data is already cached and in the temp file.
If this were 300 individual tabs with discreet content, I'd expect issues much earlier.

Of course, access and workflow is completely out the window. What data, what site, is on what tab? NFC.
Totally useless.

So....computerbroken....what is your workflow that demands 1,000+ tabs open?
Or are you just joking around?

So it's just the program/OS isn't equipped to handle that many tabs.

 

[USAFRet]

So it's just the program/OS isn't equipped to handle that many tabs.

It was just the one tab (apparently) that crashed. I'm sure if I wanted to, I could add more and more.
As said, though...not a real test, because it was simply the same content over and over.
And it wouldn't be any less useless.

I am not sufficiently invested in this issue to spend my time listing and opening 500+ individual URL's.

We've not seen any reply from the OP about this particular requirement. Which is the basis for any design...hardware or software.
Why?

 

[KirbysHammer]

So it's just the program/OS isn't equipped to handle that many tabs.

It was just the one tab (apparently) that crashed. I'm sure if I wanted to, I could add more and more.
As said, though...not a real test, because it was simply the same content over and over.
And it wouldn't be any less useless.

I am not sufficiently invested in this issue to spend my time listing and opening 500+ individual URL's.

We've not seen any reply from the OP about this particular requirement. Which is the basis for any design...hardware or software.
Why?

Just tried on my laptop.

i7-5500u (Dual core, hyerthreading, turbo boosting to 2.9GHz)
16GB RAM
Windows 10 home
Chrome

CPU choked at around 210 tabs. RAM usage around 10GB.

 

[KirbysHammer]

OK, so I tried it.
Specs:
i7 4790k, stock speed
32GB DDR3 RAM
500GB SSD
Win 10 Pro
FireFox 55.0.2 32bit

I have my FF browser set to open with 7 default tabs. 1 local HTML file, and 6 x from elsewhere on the www.
Middle click on the Home button opens a new 7 tabs of the same content. Repeat 19x in each browser instance.

3 FF browser windows
#1 - (this one), 13 tabs open
#2 - 7 x 20 iterations = 140 tabs
#3 - 7 x 20 iterations = 140 tabs

So....just shy of 300 open tabs.
One of the tabs on the original FF instance crashed. Recoverable.
Approx 3 minutes before all the spinners on the individual tabs stopped spinning.
CPU use never went over 10%
RAM usage topped out at 8.1GB. Currently idling at 6.5GB with all 293 tabs still open.

Issues:
This is not a real test, because this is opening the same URL's over and over. All the images and data is already cached and in the temp file.
If this were 300 individual tabs with discreet content, I'd expect issues much earlier.

Of course, access and workflow is completely out the window. What data, what site, is on what tab? NFC.
Totally useless.

So....computerbroken....what is your workflow that demands 1,000+ tabs open?
Or are you just joking around?

32 bit you said? That isn't an accurate test then. 32 bit can only access up to 3.5GB of memory.

 

[USAFRet]

32 bit you said? That isn't an accurate test then. 32 bit can only access up to 3.5GB of memory.

Yes, the 32bit FF install.
OS is obviously 64bit.

 

[KirbysHammer]

32 bit you said? That isn't an accurate test then. 32 bit can only access up to 3.5GB of memory.

Yes, the 32bit FF install.
OS is obviously 64bit.

A 32 bit install of FF can only address up to 4GB of RAM.

 

[USAFRet]

32 bit you said? That isn't an accurate test then. 32 bit can only access up to 3.5GB of memory.

Yes, the 32bit FF install.
OS is obviously 64bit.

A 32 bit install of FF can only address up to 4GB of RAM.

Right.

 

[KirbysHammer]

32 bit you said? That isn't an accurate test then. 32 bit can only access up to 3.5GB of memory.

Yes, the 32bit FF install.
OS is obviously 64bit.

A 32 bit install of FF can only address up to 4GB of RAM.

Right.

So if you decide to run the test again you should use 64 bit FF.

 

[USAFRet]

So if you decide to run the test again you should use 64 bit FF.

Eventually, yes. I've been considering changing it to the 64bit version.
But...as the system is working perfectly right now, that is a very low priority.

 

[13thmonkey]

given that chrome at least spawns individual processes for each 'tab' is the limit not actually 3.5GB per 'tab', is it not likewise for FF where each tab is an isolated instance?

 

[USAFRet]

given that chrome at least spawns individual processes for each 'tab' is the limit not actually 3.5GB per 'tab', is it not likewise for FF where each tab is an isolated instance?

Currently, FF spawns a new process for each browser instance.
I had 3 instances open, so 3 individual line items in Task Manager.

RAM was not the LIMFAC with this. Even at the 32bit level.
And once they were all open and everything settled down...RAM usage was minimal.
I probably could have opened another 500 'tabs'. Just probably not open ALL of them all at once.

The usability of 300 tabs or more, however, was uncontrollable, and a fools errand.

 

[13thmonkey]

It's a very pointless idea, groups of 'page sets' as book marks that you load on demand would be better. Or learning enough programming to pull whatever data you are looking for from each page, into a single aggregation page.

 

[computerbroken]

i7-5500u (Dual core, hyerthreading, turbo boosting to 2.9GHz)
16GB RAM
Windows 10 home
Chrome

CPU choked at around 210 tabs. RAM usage around 10GB.

what does this mean?

this this mean the cpu or ram was the limit for the 200 tabs? not loaded all at once im assuming

the tabs being the same content or not shouldn't matter any

after the tabs loaded, was performance slow, or was everything fine at those specs?

or the type of drive was making it slow, if it was slow?

---

if loaded all at once (this is when the content being different would matter as it's getting new updated content from the pages even if they were all on the same site llike youtube),

would the cpu, ram, or 100mps internet be the limit?

or is the os? win10 vs chromeos, does it even matter? haven't decided on os yet

 

[USAFRet]

what does this mean?

You've seen two different tests, from 2 people on completely different systems.
Multi hundred 'tabs' open, in different browsers, with varying levels of success.

And yes, all tabs opening the same content does matter. A lot.
You really need to understand why that is so.


Yet you've still not addressed the actual usability of several hundred tabs open at the same time.
Which is much better handled in other ways.

So...why? From your original...1,000+ tabs open. What is the use case for this? How do you plan to manage the data, from a human (UX) perspective?

 

[KirbysHammer]

i7-5500u (Dual core, hyerthreading, turbo boosting to 2.9GHz)
16GB RAM
Windows 10 home
Chrome

CPU choked at around 210 tabs. RAM usage around 10GB.

what does this mean?

this this mean the cpu or ram was the limit for the 200 tabs? not loaded all at once im assuming

the tabs being the same content or not shouldn't matter any

after the tabs loaded, was performance slow, or was everything fine at those specs?

or the type of drive was making it slow, if it was slow?

---

if loaded all at once (this is when the content being different would matter as it's getting new updated content from the pages even if they were all on the same site llike youtube),

would the cpu, ram, or 100mps internet be the limit?

or is the os? win10 vs chromeos, does it even matter? haven't decided on os yet

The CPU was the limit, I said the CPU choked. It was pegged at 100%.

 

[KirbysHammer]

what does this mean?

You've seen two different tests, from 2 people on completely different systems.
Multi hundred 'tabs' open, in different browsers, with varying levels of success.

And yes, all tabs opening the same content does matter. A lot.
You really need to understand why that is so.


Yet you've still not addressed the actual usability of several hundred tabs open at the same time.
Which is much better handled in other ways.

So...why? From your original...1,000+ tabs open. What is the use case for this? How do you plan to manage the data, from a human (UX) perspective?

I think the bottleneck on more powerful hardware is not hardware speed but rather the OS/Browser wasn't designed to handle more than about 70-80 tabs at once, which is about the limit for usability, and if you don't want to be scrolling around the limit is more like 15 tabs.

So why on earth do you need 1000 tabs?

At that point you're better off writing a script to remember every URL you've been to and put it in a search engine/database on your computer. That's how inefficient and silly it is to have 1000 tabs open.

 

[computerbroken]

does it even matter? haven't decided on os yet

The CPU was the limit, I said the CPU choked. It was pegged at 100%.

[/quotemsg]

any charts for how much ram to get for each cpu options?

just going to pick cpu based on highst ratings on amaz since there seems to be no other good ways