• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Firefox 3 memory usage write up

Sazar

F@H - Is it in you?
Staff member
Political User
#2
Sweet :)

I will be keen to see if this trend continues once extensions are updated for FF3 or if they will tighten restrictions on what extensions can use wrt resources.

My biggest gripe about FF has always been memory usage.
 

Aprox

Moderator
Political User
#3
Great find, cookies inbound. I love that they have put energy into this... I always got the impression nobody besides users cared. :-\
 

j79zlr

Glaanies script monkey
Political User
#4
Sweet :)

I will be keen to see if this trend continues once extensions are updated for FF3 or if they will tighten restrictions on what extensions can use wrt resources.

My biggest gripe about FF has always been memory usage.
I constantly here this yet I've used Firefox for years since the Phoenix days on numerous platforms and have never noticed a memory issue. I don't care what task manager syas, but have you ever actually noticed a performance hit? Do you load tons of extensions?

I am currently on FreeBSD, I've had firefox open for about 3 hours and it is reported as using 120MB of memory.

Code:
last pid: 64523;  load averages:  0.13,  0.09,  0.12    up 1+06:50:18  19:23:41
83 processes:  1 running, 82 sleeping
CPU states:     % user,     % nice,     % system,     % interrupt,     % idle
Mem: 328M Active, 1082M Inact, 204M Wired, 11M Cache, 112M Buf, 367M Free
Swap: 2047M Total, 2047M Free

  PID USERNAME    THR PRI NICE   SIZE    RES STATE  C   TIME   WCPU COMMAND
24586 root          1  96    0 85940K 68552K select 0   7:28  0.05% Xorg
25108 joe           1  96    0 31816K 16364K select 0   8:06  0.00% gkrellm
[B]56702 joe           7  96    0   120M 83848K ucond  0   1:31  0.00% firefox-bin[/B]
  942 root          1  96    0  4520K  1348K select 0   0:40  0.00% hald-addon-
  940 root          1  96    0  4520K  1348K select 1   0:37  0.00% hald-addon-
24652 joe           1  96    0 17376K 11056K select 0   0:26  0.00% metacity
24703 joe           1  96    0 44984K 16196K select 1   0:24  0.00% mixer_apple
56827 joe           2  -8    0 60440K 21296K piperd 0   0:21  0.00% gnome-termi
24662 joe           1  96    0 75156K 35636K select 1   0:15  0.00% nautilus
  921 haldaemon     1  96    0  6392K  3728K select 1   0:14  0.00% hald
24691 joe           1  96    0 44572K 16608K select 0   0:10  0.00% wnck-applet
24657 joe           1  96    0  5028K  2460K select 1   0:10  0.00% gam_server
24655 joe           1  96    0 59584K 25048K select 1   0:06  0.00% gnome-panel
  810 messagebus    1  96    0  3260K  1564K select 1   0:03  0.00% dbus-daemon
24681 joe           1  96    0  6004K  3264K select 0   0:03  0.00% xscreensave
24673 joe           1  96    0 20620K 10552K select 0   0:03  0.00% gnome-volum
That seems to be the average anytime I check it, between 50 & 150MB of RAM usage.
 

Perris Calderon

Moderator
Staff member
Political User
#5
I constantly here this yet I've used Firefox for years since the Phoenix days on numerous platforms and have never noticed a memory issue. I don't care what task manager syas, but have you ever actually noticed a performance hit? Do you load tons of extensions?

I am currently on FreeBSD, I've had firefox open for about 3 hours and it is reported as using 120MB of memory.

Code:
last pid: 64523;  load averages:  0.13,  0.09,  0.12    up 1+06:50:18  19:23:41
83 processes:  1 running, 82 sleeping
CPU states:     % user,     % nice,     % system,     % interrupt,     % idle
Mem: 328M Active, 1082M Inact, 204M Wired, 11M Cache, 112M Buf, 367M Free
Swap: 2047M Total, 2047M Free

  PID USERNAME    THR PRI NICE   SIZE    RES STATE  C   TIME   WCPU COMMAND
24586 root          1  96    0 85940K 68552K select 0   7:28  0.05% Xorg
25108 joe           1  96    0 31816K 16364K select 0   8:06  0.00% gkrellm
[B]56702 joe           7  96    0   120M 83848K ucond  0   1:31  0.00% firefox-bin[/B]
  942 root          1  96    0  4520K  1348K select 0   0:40  0.00% hald-addon-
  940 root          1  96    0  4520K  1348K select 1   0:37  0.00% hald-addon-
24652 joe           1  96    0 17376K 11056K select 0   0:26  0.00% metacity
24703 joe           1  96    0 44984K 16196K select 1   0:24  0.00% mixer_apple
56827 joe           2  -8    0 60440K 21296K piperd 0   0:21  0.00% gnome-termi
24662 joe           1  96    0 75156K 35636K select 1   0:15  0.00% nautilus
  921 haldaemon     1  96    0  6392K  3728K select 1   0:14  0.00% hald
24691 joe           1  96    0 44572K 16608K select 0   0:10  0.00% wnck-applet
24657 joe           1  96    0  5028K  2460K select 1   0:10  0.00% gam_server
24655 joe           1  96    0 59584K 25048K select 1   0:06  0.00% gnome-panel
  810 messagebus    1  96    0  3260K  1564K select 1   0:03  0.00% dbus-daemon
24681 joe           1  96    0  6004K  3264K select 0   0:03  0.00% xscreensave
24673 joe           1  96    0 20620K 10552K select 0   0:03  0.00% gnome-volum
That seems to be the average anytime I check it, between 50 & 150MB of RAM usage.
well j79, you make a great point, what task manager reports as being used is just memory that's claimed, much of that is just claimed, released as needed

I've never been a firefox fan but one thing, I really never noticed a computer slow down with it

how many windows can you open with firefox?

I can usually open between 32 and 40 in internet explorer
 

j79zlr

Glaanies script monkey
Political User
#6
Maybe thats the thing, I usually have between 5 & 10 tabs open, a couple forums and a stock ticker just to make sure that I am losing the requisite amount of money on the day.
 
#7
I frequently and up with nothing but tab icons when at work. WHile XP's task manager is inaccurate, it reports firefox as being close to 900MB, the system is sluggish and firefox hangs for 5-10 seconds when scrolling or changing tab.

Maybe those that don't see issues aren't using it very heavily.
 

falconguard

Carbon based lifeform
Political User
#8
Could this also be a case of using AJAX as these some heavy AJAX sites will use a lot of bandwidth for modules especially if they don't load quite right? This could be a problem especially if a lot of tabs are used in the browser itself. I have noticed that this does seem to affect other browsers as well, namely Opera which is my preferred browser.

This seems to happen with the increased usage of tabs and the amount of tabs that are open. Strangely enough I have a pretty good record with an IE shell Maxthon.

just something to consider.
 

SPeedY_B

I may actually be insane.
#9
Always good to see, I don't think I've personally ever had FireFox be so bogged down that it's been unresponsive in any way and I've pretty much always god a fair few tabs open.

I'll be interested in seeing if the OS X build turns out anywhere near as fast as it's Windows and Linux counterparts though.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Electronic Punk wrote on Perris Calderon's profile.
All good still mate?
Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me ...
Xie
What a long strange trip it's been. =)

Forum statistics

Threads
61,961
Messages
673,239
Members
89,015
Latest member
evaiwhitis