Comments on: Browser Comparison: Memory Usage, Speed, Acid 3 Test

By: Joao

Joao — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:36:41 +0000

I have experienced all off this browsers and no doubt that Opera is my 1st choise!

By: Hanson

Hanson — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 06:09:30 +0000

K-MELEON [kmeleon.sourceforge.net] is indeed the fastest browser using the least memory and in fact much less than Firefox. The browser looks similar to Firefox so it is familiar and easy to use. It works perfectly even on the oldest computer. Try it. You won’t regret it.

By: Jeggie

Jeggie — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 17:04:03 +0000

Must be nice to be able to afford any hardware one desires. Not all of us have that option, and, therefore, have to make due with older hardware.

By: shubham

shubham — Thu, 12 May 2011 23:53:20 +0000

exactly, i love firefox for its simplicity and versatility and my university provides a 360mbps wlan connection(n channel) so i see virtually no difference in page loading time and speed.

By: Harry V Erlandz

Harry V Erlandz — Sun, 01 May 2011 12:26:51 +0000

Hello everybody.
I seem to be alone with my problem and my opinions.
I have been waiting for a browser that does use the HD for tabs.
In my kind of work the ONLY good solution would be to have just the local HD address in memory for ALL nonactive tabs, and thus only one full page in memory.
Some people immediately start talkin about lost speed!
That is simply silly. Why?
I have need for a very high number of tabs which results in slow working speed of the computer and the software as a result of too low physical memory!!
On the other hand reading one page from the HD seldom takes more than a fraction of a second; and with only one page at a time in memory the computer/software keep up maximal reaction times and speed.

Has anybody heard of an existing or planned browser which could solve this apparent problem?

I can see no real drawback in only having one page at a time in physical memory, and I assume that should not be impossible to solve for a good programmer (maybe in the Mozilla community?).

By: 41

41 — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:21:37 +0000

Lies, lies, lies.
Firefox 3 & 4 leak memory by the buckets and never gets below 250 mb (clean install).

By: Pete56

Pete56 — Sun, 06 Jun 2010 01:57:22 +0000

I’m nowhere near computer savvy, but so far on my $100 Toshiba NoRAM re-build, Opera seems to be the one that doesn’t put the computer into a digibetic coma as often.

By: Mikey

Mikey — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 20:59:34 +0000

I wish they would have included Firefox 2. I know its outdated but I still use it because it doesn’t have all the add ons and visual aspects fire fox 3 has which makes it use a lot more memory.

By: ke$ha

ke$ha — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 13:13:30 +0000

nothing safari isnt so good it sucks opera 10.5 is the best then comes mozilla…..chrome is good for people with high config computers where memory consumption isnt a problem ~!~

By: used them all

used them all — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:15:42 +0000

For those Windows PC’s have 1GB or less, the amount of time spent swapping to virtual memory is significant with a memory hungry browser. From a memory and speed perspective, Firefox seems to be the overall winner.