Firefox 13 to be 2.5x Better Than Chrome in Memory Usage

[freggo]

[citation][nom]beayn[/nom]In a few years this will be like nVidia driver versions... We'll have Firefox 293 and Chrome 322...[/citation]

They are just trying to keep up with the car manufacturers.

Chrysler is up to 300, Mercedes to 500 and BMW to the 700s

 

[alphaalphaalpha3]

Firefox is already the most memory efficient browser with high tab counts. If Mozilla is improving that and the memory management (Firefox is memory efficient, but sorely lacking in proper memory management) then the only other huge improvement I really want to see is multi-threaded support. Of course there are other things, but these have really been the big things for me so far.

Performance optimized version of FF such as Palemoon with fasterfox, no-script, adblock, firemin, an even smaller memory foot print with better memory management, and it supports many cores. Come on Mozilla or Chrome/Opera might beat you to it!

 

[pocketdrummer]

[citation][nom]RogueKitsune[/nom]^my thoughts exactly^My desktop has 12GB of RAM and my laptop has 4GB of RAM, so as long as there is not a memory leak I really don't care that much about memory usage.[/citation]

Derp.

[citation][nom]thefive0[/nom]In the days of having 4 and 8GB of RAM, is memory usage really that important?[/citation]

Derp.

 

[gm0n3y]

If I open Chrome and FF right now and load a bunch of tabs, Chrome actually uses quite a bit more memory than FF. But use both browsers for a few hours and FF's memory chunk will continue to grow as needed and never give any of it back. Chrome takes an initial large amount of RAM but gives it up when it's finished.

 

[knowom]

Firefox is the best since it provides the best plugins. Speed wise it's marginally slower at worst, but that's more than offset by the amount of time people waste due to distracting adds and pop ups in other browsers who's plugins don't do as well a job at filtering and blocking them as firefox is able to do so. Additionally if your really looking to improve browser speed use a web cache proxy like squid ccpb it'll do far more to improve speed then a simple switch between firefox, chrome, or any other browser will do.

 

[RogueKitsune]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]What about folks with 2GB or less ram because they can't upgrade the RAM anymore?[/citation]

Then I suggest you upgrade to something that is not older than windows XP. I mean even tablets and smart phones are fast approaching the 2GB of memory mark

 

[fishyfish]

[citation][nom]RogueKitsune[/nom]Then I suggest you upgrade to something that is not older than windows XP. I mean even tablets and smart phones are fast approaching the 2GB of memory mark[/citation]

New iPad will get 1GB and that's apparently market leader.. Why should we spend money on new hardware every 12 months only because few folks in Mozilla can't do their job properly and fix memory issues?

 

[juan83]

[citation][nom]lordstormdragon[/nom]To all users complaining about Firefox's memory usage: install MemoryFox, already. It's a free add-on. It comes up second if you Google-search "memory firefox". It will take care of your memory problems, just as it has for the past few years to those who know how to use Google or any search engine."Oh, but I shouldn't NEED an add-on to handle my memory issues!" Well, yes you should. Add-ons are created so people will stop whining and get back to work. So do just that, people![/citation]

i love firefox, and is my default browser, but it's true, on every update i loose a cup of add-ons, witch aren't compatible with the new version. It's a really petty, because i know they are safe.. i hope a new version allow us to install them under our own risk, even when yield a wrong behavior, let me decide to me if i want to enable the add-on or not.
i'm checking every day for a specific add-on update that never arrives.

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]yea flash sucks in fire fox... if you are only going to open 2 or 3 pages... use something else instead, if you are going to open alot of pages, thats where ff shines.[/citation]

Agreed. I recall loading 10 Youtube videos before my internet connection goes down the toilet during the afternoon, about one hour worth of videos.

Then Flash crashed after I was halfway done with one of the videos.

 

[rex86]

I hope they do that soon because I really don't like Chromium. I want my firefox back... ;(

 

[Guest]

I don't really care if its better than Chrome, but I sure hope it's tame the appetite for Ram shown by Firefox 11, which cripples my two max 4gb ram pc's and brings my laptops with max 3gb to their knees. Word on the street is that this is a Java issue..who knows.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]Anonymous[/nom]I don't really care if its better than Chrome, but I sure hope it's tame the appetite for Ram shown by Firefox 11, which cripples my two max 4gb ram pc's and brings my laptops with max 3gb to their knees. Word on the street is that this is a Java issue..who knows.[/citation]

Considering that my laptop with only 2GB can handle hundreds of tabs in FF, I think you have other problems going on.

[citation][nom]juan83[/nom]i love firefox, and is my default browser, but it's true, on every update i loose a cup of add-ons, witch aren't compatible with the new version. It's a really petty, because i know they are safe.. i hope a new version allow us to install them under our own risk, even when yield a wrong behavior, let me decide to me if i want to enable the add-on or not.i'm checking every day for a specific add-on update that never arrives.[/citation]

It's not that FF thinks old add-ons aren't safe, but they simply aren't compatible anymore. Supposedly, this problem has been greatly lessened because newer versions of FF are supposed to increase compatibility with older and newer add-ons, so this problem might end very soon if it hasn't already. I know I've not had an add-on problem in a while now despite the rapidly updating FF.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]FishyFish[/nom]New iPad will get 1GB and that's apparently market leader.. Why should we spend money on new hardware every 12 months only because few folks in Mozilla can't do their job properly and fix memory issues?[/citation]

My 2008 Gateway M-1624 notebook has 2GB of RAM and it can handle FF with hundreds of tabs without a problem.

 

[freggo]

Now Firefox 12 -running on Windows 2000- tries to upgrade, then kindly tells you it will no longer run on Win2k.
OK, so you turn on the autoupdate option and figure you'll just continue to use FF 12.
Well, guess what. Everytime Firefox 12 starts up the same Win2k nag now shows up :-(

I am sure the folks at Mozilla did not mean for that to happen. After all, changing a browser is much easier than changing an OS.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]freggo[/nom]Now Firefox 12 -running on Windows 2000- tries to upgrade, then kindly tells you it will no longer run on Win2k.OK, so you turn on the autoupdate option and figure you'll just continue to use FF 12.Well, guess what. Everytime Firefox 12 starts up the same Win2k nag now shows up :-(I am sure the folks at Mozilla did not mean for that to happen. After all, changing a browser is much easier than changing an OS.[/citation]

It's a 12 year old OS. I'm surprised that the modern browsers have any support for it at all.

 

[freggo]

[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]It's a 12 year old OS. I'm surprised that the modern browsers have any support for it at all.[/citation]

That's not the point. If your new version is no longer compatible, that is cool.
But than adding a mod to the last version that was working fine to pop up an annoying message each time you start the browser one must wonder if they got paid by Microsoft to do that.
A Machine running Win2k is most likely to old to effectifely run Windows Vista with the latest browser. So it is not a matter of updating the OS but also the hardware.
If said machine is used for Word processing and email, than Win 2k is more than enough.

And if you happen to have -as in our case- some 50 PCs like that I am not going to replace them, and retrain the 50+ people using them, especially in THIS economy just because Firefox tells me to.

Fudge Firefox! We removed them all and replaced them with Opera.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]freggo[/nom]That's not the point. If your new version is no longer compatible, that is cool.But than adding a mod to the last version that was working fine to pop up an annoying message each time you start the browser one must wonder if they got paid by Microsoft to do that.A Machine running Win2k is most likely to old to effectifely run Windows Vista with the latest browser. So it is not a matter of updating the OS but also the hardware.If said machine is used for Word processing and email, than Win 2k is more than enough.And if you happen to have -as in our case- some 50 PCs like that I am not going to replace them, and retrain the 50+ people using them, especially in THIS economy just because Firefox tells me to. Fudge Firefox! We removed them all and replaced them with Opera.[/citation]

You have a good point, but mine still stands too.