Slashdot Mirror
Real-World Firefox 3 Memory Usage Leads the Field
An anonymous reader writes "The author developed a program to snapshot memory usage per process every 3 seconds on Windows. Using this he recorded 3 hours of memory usage for five different browsers under real-world usage scenarios: Safari 3.1, Firefox 3, Flock 1.2 (a browser based on Firefox 2), Opera 9.5, and Internet Explorer 8. A million data points indicate that Firefox 3 has a surprising advantage over the other browsers tested. These are real-world tests and not contrived benchmarks."
I find that for certain hours of the day (namely in the evening) My memory usage skyrockets. It probably has to do with the increased number of images I am loading :D
Service Not Available.
At the time of posting this, there were like, 10 comments in the thread. Assuming that only 10% of all /.ers RTFA, that means that the site can support only 1 simultaneous user.
A One that isn't cold, is scarcely a One at all.
Already /.-ed? Or do I have to use any of the mentioned browsers... :-)
Quisque verborum suorum optimus interpres...
If they didn't compare with Dillo/lynx, it's meaningless. Also, already slashdotted.
Cue Iraqi spokesman
There are no memory leaks. All memory usage is as we intend it to be. Any reports of leaks are lies by people who do not understand our page caching system. The infidels will never take Baghdad.
Check out my sysadmin blog!
"The system is Windows Vista SP1, and the computer has 3.0+ GB of RAM."
3.0+?? that's not very, er..exact. just like his test.
"I wrote software that collected millions of data points over 14 hours of actual browsing time, and this article reveals my findings."
"It uses a timer to poll the processes every 3 seconds."
14*3600/3=16800 which is still much lower than million. To reach million he would have to test each browser for more than a month.
You think you actually impress anyone with your feeble comment? Is this what substitutes for wit in today's troll community?
Oh wait, it's just that you can use a computer. Well golly, let me bow to your insights on discussion forums.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Looking at the RAM usage from TFA, 120 megabytes is acceptable. Web browsers apparently use a lot of RAM (when you load a lot of sites).
<keynote style="Steve">
Safari on OS XI is going to be 400% faster. It's going to look 700% rounder, and integrate seamlessly with your ego. It will make you 1500% more smug, no matter how smug you were before.
Firefox ? Not smug.
IE8 ? *chuckles* next slide.
Opera ? They still have square corners, what does that tell you about their priorities ?
It's so awesome we had to give it a new name: Snow Safari.
(*applause*)
</keynote>
-Billco, Fnarg.com
' They're trying to charge money ofr something everyone else gives away for free, and with the latest browsers they're running out of legitimate advantages to boast."
Please change that template, it is 2008 already.
No wonder it uses less memory.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Firefox running on an AMD processor uses "2200+" Mb of memory, which actually means about 100 Mb in an Intel processor
Or, the other user is the botnet admin who 0wnz his box.
Flappinbooger isn't my real name
You might say I'm a heavy browser user.
With all those sockpuppets, of course you are one hell of a heavy browser user.
AC because I modded this thread.