KezNews.com
DownloadsOther NewsForumBlogsWallpapersJokewareSearch

News letter:


Enter Your E-mail:

Memory test - Firefox 2.0.0.9 vs Firefox 3.0 b 1


section: common, for your questions: KezNews forum, 21.11.2007

Does Firefox 3.0 beta 1 do a better job of handling memory than earlier versions? In a test put Firefox 3.0 beta up against Firefox 2.0.0.9 in a series of tests.




Before I go any further, a few disclaimers and notes. First off, I’ve carried out this test on a single system running Windows Vista Home Premium on which Firefox had not been previously installed. The system has 2GB of RAM. Both Firefox 2.0.0.9 and Firefox 3.0 b 1 were installed fresh using a standard install. For each test I visited the same web pages and did my best to make the browsing the same on both versions.

OK, with that out of the way, on with the tests. I simulated three different browsing scenarios:

* Loading a five pages into the browser
* Loading a single page and leaving the browser for 10 minutes
* Loading 12 pages into the browser and wait 5 minutes

Here are the results:

Firefox 2.0.0.9

* The memory test - Firefox 2.0.0.9 vs Firefox 3.0 b 1Loading a five pages into the browser - 35,640KB (img)
* Loading a single page and leaving the browser for 10 minutes - 47,852KB (img)
* Loading 12 pages into the browser and wait 5 minutes - 103,180KB (img)

Firefox 3.0 b 1

* Loading a five pages into the browser - 38,644KB (img)
* Loading a single page and leaving the browser for 10 minutes - 63,764KB (img)
* Loading 12 pages into the browser and wait 5 minutes - 62,312KB (img)

Check out the complete screenshot gallery.

Just to give us a baseline, I repeated the 12 page test using Internet Explorer 7 and found that the browser used 89,756KB (img), more than Firefox 3.0 beta 1 but substantially less than Firefox 2.0.0.9.

source: blogs.zdnet.com

send email Send link 2 friend  |  Permalink
<< previouse article
Vista Not the Last Release of Windows as We Know It – Enter Windows 7
next article >>
Windows XP SP3 moves closer to completion

MORE RELATED ARTICLES:
First look at Firefox 3.0 Beta 1 || Firefox 3 Beta 3 || Firefox 3 vs IE 7 vs Safari 3.1 || Firefox 3.0 Release Candidate 1 || Mozilla Firefox 3.0 RC2

Comments(4)

not for me

By kj on 21.11.2007 - 23:11
i opened fiefox. i didnt open any tabs only loaded google. i watched as mem use slowly increaded to 1,500,000 k before my system crashed. i quickly uninstalled the beta. anyone else with this problem.

Whats the point

By xavier on 22.11.2007 - 05:11
many users have 2gb now on their mb, with the prices of the memory dropping.
whats the problem with having 100mb memory used.
how much does vista use ?

Very small test

By Yull on 22.11.2007 - 18:11
i use, at home and at work, both opera (is fast, light and has a good download manager) and portable firefox 2.0.0.8 (is more stable and i use several extensions)
some firefox 2 extensions don't work on firefox 3, that was disappointing for me.

firefox 3.0 b looks as fast as opera is on a 256 mb ram (job computer) and a 2gb ram (my home computer).

Very small test

By Yull on 22.11.2007 - 18:11
i use, at home and at work, both opera (is fast, light and has a good download manager) and portable firefox 2.0.0.8 (is more stable and i use several extensions)
some firefox 2 extensions don't work on firefox 3, that was disappointing for me.

firefox 3.0 b looks as fast as opera is on a 256 mb ram (job computer) and a 2gb ram (my home computer). but firefox 3.0b seems to have bugs one example: in the bookmarks manager i can't set a new separator.

keep working on it!


No new comments are allowed for this article.

For your questions use our KezNews Forum