Firefox 15 Does Better On WebGL, Debugging, RAM Usage

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Firefox 15 Does Better On WebGL, Debugging, RAM Usage

Mozilla had officially released Firefox 15.0 this morning with many new features...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE3MDc

[kwahoo]

I compared Mozilla's BananaBread and UE3 Flash (in Chrome, FF is still slightly slower)

and BB was 2x faster;-)

@curaga
Do you need *.gif version?

[Linuxxx]

@curaga
Do you need *.gif version?

Good One!!

[Decatf]

It seems like every release they say memory usage is improved but I don't see much noticeable change. It's starting to feel meaningless like how every Ubuntu release is said to be faster, smoother, have quicker boot time, feel "snappier".

[smitty3268]

It seems like every release they say memory usage is improved but I don't see much noticeable change. It's starting to feel meaningless like how every Ubuntu release is said to be faster, smoother, have quicker boot time, feel "snappier".

I don't think 15 really reduces memory use under "normal" situations, it just fixes a bunch of memory leaks that were created by a lot of different extensions. So if you used to have problems with Firefox leaking tons of memory over time, this may be the release that fixes it for you. But I don't think there's going to be much further reductions in the baseline memory use.

In fact, I think FF15 is when compartment-per-global landed, so that probably increases the baseline memory use.

[crazycheese]

I was recently in need for a modern browser on a very lowend machine - P4 with 512Mb. So, I had to compare Fx with Google Chrome/ium. I opened several websites and surfed a little, then let the machine stay for 3 hours. The results were astonishing - Fx-50MiB, Chrome-300MiB (up to crossing the 480MiB boundary total). I know that Chrome has a bit faster Javascript, but in terms of Ram usage Fx is clearly better.

[Tiger_Coder]

I was recently in need for a modern browser on a very lowend machine - P4 with 512Mb. So, I had to compare Fx with Google Chrome/ium. I opened several websites and surfed a little, then let the machine stay for 3 hours. The results were astonishing - Fx-50MiB, Chrome-300MiB (up to crossing the 480MiB boundary total). I know that Chrome has a bit faster Javascript, but in terms of Ram usage Fx is clearly better.

True, on my PC chrome 64bit opened with 20+ tabs and running for 4 hour can consume as much as 1.5GB ram. I switch to chrome from firefox 3.5 when I had a old PC but now Chrome is more Ram hungry then FF.

[89c51]

The WebGL problems with FF were (or are) driver related right ????

I remember they were only supporting blobs.

[kwahoo]

I remember they were only supporting blobs.

From the demo page:

Mesa on Firefox 15 on Linux does not support compressed textures, but it works in Firefox 16.

That's all, FF16 WebGL works fine (tested on R600g).

[dashcloud]

Hi guys, here's the blog post you want for explaining what's special about Firefox 15 with regards to RAM usage:
http://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/...-add-on-leaks/

If you'd like to see the progress being made on the Memshrink project (which aims to reduce memory usage), this is the blog to follow. It's updated every 2 weeks now with what's happened with the project.

The wiki page for the Memshrink project is here: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Performance/MemShrink