Why you SHOULD be using Firefox

[BananaDunka]

When you load that gallery, did you scroll to the end of the initial view, as there's an expansion link to "load 230+ more". Nothing in my FF has changed, and it's /only/ this gallery that does it as all content inc gifs/clips in it are loading all at once.

 

[yashiro]

Loaded everything in your gallery (clicked load +700 images link) and scrolled until all the auto-generated imgur guff started appearing at the bottom. Even scrolled very slowly so it loaded everything. Numbers were fine, same as the Edge numbers more or less.

Disable all your extensions and re-test it maybe.

 

[BananaDunka]

I only have a handful of extensions, the CPU usage remains spikey up to 65-75% when loading and scrolling that gallery, whether I have two windows open with multiple YT tabs etc or all tabs on one window doesn't matter.

All 5 extensions disabled (none of which are CPU hungry anyway) this doesn't change.

The only thing I can think of is that in the past I changed an about:config setting for resource use.... a big maybe though, since I know I've reset firefox in the past too when I wanted to simply start a new profile.

With the gallery closed CPU usage is 0% and 3GB RAM used which is expected given the number of other media tabs I have open.

And for ref, Firefox is not slow at all at any point, it actually loads instantaneously on click, whether it's a cold start or not doesn't matter. Even Edge doesn't load as quick as FF does on my machine.

 

[haveaniceday]

I'm currently using floorp browser You could call it the Vivaldi of Firefox forks, you get all the Firefox things plus extras. It seems quicker, a lot quicker to me

 

[BananaDunka]

I'm gonna try Floord alongside Firefox, it does look good and supports all the Mozilla sync stuff that I use so I should be able to get it 1:1 to my Firefox, just more streamlined internally. I can then compare the above resource use again

 

[BananaDunka]

Floorp up and running 1:1 to Firefox, just on a fresh new profile. Looks like the CPU usage settles on Floorp once the whole gallery linked above has loaded, and RAM use is clearly lower too.

Side by side:

And Floorp open on its own with my usual view, two windows side by side with media tabs on the right:

The main task here was to see if my about:config and prefs.js was dirty with old data that might be causing the memory/CPU use, but this doesn't seem to be the case and it's just down to Firefox being resource heavy under certain configurations, which Floorp appears to be a bit more efficient with - Although both browsers' observable performance generally is identical, both insanely rapid with no latency observed in anything.

I like it though, it's got some extra tweaks and options to play with and speed between FF and Floorp appears to be exactly the same so no issues there. It uses it's own Floorp DNS by default, so be sure to turn that off if you use something like CLoudflare/Quad9 etc, as you will be bypassing those most likely for various sites.

 

[opethdisciple]

Got nothing against it, just don't enable the 'spoof chrome' option as you aren't doing anything good for the health of the web.

Its just further making every developer / website out there code their websites for chrome further killing off Firefox.

 

[BananaDunka]

Yeah not sure why anyone would change their broadcast to be chrome tbh.

 

[roachyuk]

What I don't like about that feature that allows you to set the browser string to chrome is it doesn't convince web developers to code their application in an browser agnostic way and just further chromifies the web.

I always worry about security on these fork browsers aswell.....do not think id use them for say banking or any thing that is sensitive nature either.

 

[BananaDunka]

So looks like I will have to switch back to Firefox!

Spent the evening searching around and doing faff and then realised the time... Basically Netflix won't work because of the "widevine DRM" certification hasn't been given, well Floorp devs applied for it, but Netflix simply didn't reply, so it's been in limbo for months it seems. Likewise Prime Video does work, but only at 720p... Again, needs the DRM certification.

Otherwise it's a fine browser, safe etc.

I have Netflix/Prime Video tabs open when working on other stuff so this is kinda important for my use.

Shame.

 

[Murphy]

Mow much RAM /CPU do your Firefoxes use when viewing this rather larger screenshot gallery I have been curating over the years:

With 4 other tabs open (one YT video playing in background) I'm getting around 1,500 MB

So I'm inclined to agree with what yashiro says about something being a bit broken with your FF install.

e: Even after scrolling through the entire gallery waiting for each image to load before scrolling to the next screen it still only uses 1,900-2,000 MB. With the images it previously loaded seemingly getting unloaded as when i scrolled back through it had to reload some of the images it loaded on the first pass.

 

[BananaDunka]

I mean I'm seeing the high RAM use with Floorp (though not as high) and the same use with the newly freshly installed Firefox now that I'm back to FF from Floorp given the above with Netflix so can't have been my install. Maybe it's just an allocation thing since I have 64GB of RAM and Windows/aps just use/allocate everything they do or might need which is what I'm seeing. The browser install and configuration is perfectly fine.

Take this below for example, I do not have thegallery open in a tab, and this Firefox install is the fresh new one, literally as I used Uninstalr to wipe out the old install right down to registry remnants, and both browser windows open with those tabs are showing this RAM usage:

 

[FredFlint]

I mean I'm seeing the high RAM use with Floorp (though not as high) and the same use with the newly freshly installed Firefox now that I'm back to FF from Floorp given the above with Netflix so can't have been my install. Maybe it's just an allocation thing since I have 64GB of RAM and Windows/aps just use/allocate everything they do or might need which is what I'm seeing. The browser install and configuration is perfectly fine.

Take this below for example, I do not have thegallery open in a tab, and this Firefox install is the fresh new one, literally as I used Uninstalr to wipe out the old install right down to registry remnants, and both browser windows open with those tabs are showing this RAM usage:

At one point FF was using up-to 4GB on my PC, it’s not as bad now as it seems to level off at about 1GB after running for a few hours (YouTube/Netflix and stuff). I don’t have lots of tabs open, normally 1-4.

 

[Murphy]

Take this below for example

Is that on a new profile? Because it seems odd for FF to have 22 child processes if you only have two windows open with one only having 3 tabs.

I've only got one session open but with 8 tabs it's only spawned 7 child processes.

 

[BananaDunka]

New profile yes.

Is that on a new profile? Because it seems odd for FF to have 22 child processes if you only have two windows open with one only having 3 tabs.

I've only got one session open but with 8 tabs it's only spawned 7 child processes.

That figure in task manager isn't for open tabs alone, it's for open processes, Firefox opens a new process for each thing it does, like extensions share the same process/memory thread, individual tabs each have their own processes and other stuff the browser is doing is process based. Unlike in the past, if one process crashes, then the rest of the browser and its features remain stable, only the crashed process is affected and can be stopped/closed etc.

Example, right now pressing SHIFT+ESC to load FF's task manager (sorted by memory usage order):

I can count 44 processes which is what Windows Task Manager is showing:

Even though I only have 15 tabs open across 2 browser windows, so 17 processes you would assume.

 

[Murphy]

That figure in task manager isn't for open tabs alone, it's for open processes, Firefox opens a new process for each thing it does, like extensions share the same process/memory thread, individual tabs each have their own processes and other stuff the browser is doing is process based. Unlike in the past, if one process crashes, then the rest of the browser and its features remain stable, only the crashed process is affected and can be stopped/closed etc.

I know that's why i questioned the reason FF had spawned 22 child processes when you only had two windows with 4 tabs, if that's all you did it shouldn't be spawning so many child processes.

If you're seeing the same thing on a fresh install with a fresh profile (fresh profiles shouldn't have extension installed) then the only other thing i could put it down to is a lack of understanding on how modern memory management. The 22 child processes and the screenshot of two windows with 4 tabs and mixing up the tools (taskmanager and FF) you're using to measure memory usage. (IDK what type of memory (committed vs reserved, vs private vs working vs physical) that either FF or TM is reporting).

e: You'd either have to research what type of memory each program is reporting or use something like...

VMMap - Sysinternals

VMMap is a process virtual and physical memory analysis utility.

learn.microsoft.com

to try and match/convert one type of reported memory usage over to another program.

 

[BananaDunka]

All I can tell you is that the processes and memory used reported by task manager matches what the about:processes (SHIFT+ESC) in Firefox reports. The number of processes is accurate, it just means every /thing/ FF does spawns a process, regardless of how many actual tabs are open. In both cases things were accurate and working normally, just having that gallery opened used extra RAM for whatever reason initially.

I open that gallery basically daily and have done for some time as it's a curated gallery. So it could well be Windows memory management seeing this behaviour trend and seeing that a large memory intensive task is being done by the user, and then using/pre-allocating more memory for that I guess, since Windows does do this, moreso the more RAM you actually have. None of this is a complaint, just an observation being talked about. Everything runs fast and there's no /real/ issue.

Now that I am on a fresh new profile, that memory use I was seeing before is greatly reduced, because it's effectively a new app install and Windows is re-learning usage behaviour for itt. I suspect if this is the case then the RAM use will go back to what it was before in a space of time as I continue to update the IMGUR gallery daily.

 

[Minato]

I use chrome on all my devices. All my google/gmail accounts logged in, tabs and browsing synced across all devices seamlessly, can have this tab open on my desktop and open it in 2 taps on my phone. Lots of extensions, and seems to work pretty fast. Google password manager again syncs all my passwords between browser and my android phone.

In 2024, are there any actually compelling reasons to switch?

 

[riddler]

Brave enters the party...

 

[Murphy]

All I can tell you is that the processes and memory used reported by task manager matches

Yes but like i said what's being reported at one moment in time is not necessarily what's being used, as demonstrated with TM showing 22 child processes with 2 windows and 4 tabs. I assume because FF and or Windows had not performed a GC and released the reserved memory from a few seconds/minutes ago when you had a load more tabs opened.

Unless you get down into the weeds you're not going to know what a programs actual memory usage is, at best you get roughly what it's been using in the last few seconds/minutes.

e: Just discovered you can force a GC so if you want to get more accurate memory usage, release memory that FF has not released automatically because there's not memory pressures and/or it's keeping around because it improves performance. On the about:memory page click the minimize memory usage button, every time you do that FF will (afaik) do a GC. (If you want to measure memory usage at that specific moment in time you should do that before taking the measurement because if you don't you've no way of knowing if the reported number includes pages that were allocated in the past but it's not got around to releasing yet for performance reasons)

Now that I am on a fresh new profile, that memory use I was seeing before is greatly reduced, because it's effectively a new app install and Windows is re-learning usage behaviour for itt. I suspect if this is the case then the RAM use will go back to what it was before in a space of time as I continue to update the IMGUR gallery daily.

Or like people have been saying something like an extension is causing it.

Windows doesn't 'learn' usage behaviour, programs makes requests and Windows tries to do what the program asks, if a program asks to reserve 1GB of virtual memory Windows attempts to do that, if a program releases that reserved memory Windows does it.