TechSpot

Mozilla promises big memory savings with Firefox 7

By Shawn Knight
Aug 10, 2011
Post New Reply
  1. Despite being ranked as the second most popular web browser, Mozilla’s Firefox has a storied past largely due to unresolved memory leaks. As with its predecessors, Firefox 7 will implement various…

    Read the whole story
     
  2. NTAPRO

    NTAPRO TS Enthusiast Posts: 811   +91

    Seems like good news to me. I remember back when people were wondering where that plugin-container.exe came from. "Firefox 7 uses less memory than Firefox 6 (and 5 and 4)" Would this mean Firefox 3.6 is superior in a way still? Or was that just not included...
     
  3. Route44

    Route44 TechSpot Ambassador Posts: 12,155   +34

    About time. It was Broni from our Virus and Malware Removal forum that informed me that it really wasn't my system but FF's memory leak that was freezing my online experience. This should have already been fixed.
     
  4. Even if add-ons increase memory loads, I've worked with purely vanilla Firefoxes and have noticed the memory leaks build up over the years. I used to recommend the use of Firefox to non-technical users on older WinXP and Win2K computers just because of the better standards compliance and update security model (especially when upgrading to the latest IE wasn't possible). No add-ons, no themes, yet people still remarked how "heavy" it feels. All that wonderful paging.

    Relatedly, it also be nice to see a metric on how much an add-on will affect Firefox performance. Right now, I just work off of experience (Adblock will increase startup times, WOT will increase load during searches, etc.), but for others who don't have the know-how or mind for these things, it couldn't hurt.
     
  5. Recycle

    Recycle TS Rookie Posts: 53

    I've been using Aurora (Firefox 7 alpha) and I can confirm that it's lighter in terms of memory usage, and I'm not gentle on it by any means (frequently 20-30+ tabs).
     
  6. Puiu

    Puiu TS Addict Posts: 1,065   +99

    It seems mozilla is pushing FF7 as the next major version, just like ff4 was for ff3.6 and ff8 should be for ff7 like ff3.6 was for ff3.5.
     
  7. NTAPRO

    NTAPRO TS Enthusiast Posts: 811   +91

    Does anyone get extra CPU usage while using this? I mean heavy CPU usage. I've had maybe around 100 tabs one time and I didn't have any trouble but I use 5 tabs and it freezes xD.
     
  8. Firefox 5 seems to use more than Chrome, but i never did a side by side comparison.
     
  9. FF 4 was a horrible experiment on it's most reliable user base. 5 wasn't much better.

    I carry around 3.6 on a usb stick so if I see it on clients computers, it's an immediate "upgrade" from 4 or 5 to 3.6.

    Best browser around, hands down. Even if it does eat my memory for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
     
  10. OK, so they brought down memory usage and leakage, and by a darn impressive margin in some cases. That's good in itself, but how does this translate to UI response snappiness, 'cause it's that last point that FF kept screwing up on and forced my hand to Opera 12. Still I find FF easier to work with in a multiple sessions scenario, and FF comes in an x86-64 flavour; a thing which I'd call an necessity 'cause I'm used to open a boatload of tabs.
     
  11. Archean

    Archean TechSpot Paladin Posts: 6,053   +76

    I was having exactly the same issue, but once they rolled out 5.0.1 update things have improved considerably.
     
     
  12. fpsgamerJR62

    fpsgamerJR62 TS Rookie Posts: 489

    I'm using the nightly builds of Firefox 8 in Windows XP SP3 and Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit and both 32 and 64 bit versions are definitely much more responsive than Firefox 5.01.
     
  13. ChrisG683

    ChrisG683 TS Rookie Posts: 41

    Everyone loves to ignore how much memory Chrome chews up due to the multi-proccess tabbing. FF5's memory usage is really good already, but on the Nightly's it's amazing how much they've cut back on the memory usage. Once they finally start implementing the Electrolysis project (UI and content separation) it will really cut down on any advantages Chrome will have.
     
  14. Still waiting for FF 6 to be released.
     
  15. $30 for 4GB of RAM, who cares about memory usage? No one complains that everything is taking up more and more space, hence the need for increased harddrive sizes. But if applications begin to use more memory, then that's a problem. You buy a bigger harddrive when you need more space, well if you're having a problem with using too much memory, buy some RAM. It's dirt cheap.
     
  16. Yeah, I was just at a local computer store and they had 12GB or Corsair DDR3 RAM on sale for 70 bucks.

    RAM isn't expensive, memory really is a problem of the past for most cases.
     
  17. Route44

    Route44 TechSpot Ambassador Posts: 12,155   +34

    First, if your system can handle all that RAM then fine. But a large majority don't have the need or don't have the motherboard to run so much RAM.

    Besides, purchasing more RAM isn't the issue. The issue is with Fire Fox's memory leakage.
     


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.