Least ram which browser?

Bhavik

Baseband Member
Messages
24
I have a old PC with around 380 ram and 1.2GHz, is opera a suitable browser for me, does it use very low ram :)? or is there other browsers that use less?
 

Remeniz

Fully Optimized
Messages
3,390
Location
England
Just loaded up Opera and Firefox browsers and with my homepage showing they both use just 78MB.

Incidentally, IE6 uses just 56MB for the same homepage! But it.......... is............. s..........l.........o..........w.

I'd say either-or on this one.
 

berry120

Fully Optimized
Messages
3,434
Location
UK
I prefer links. I'm not sure which has the smaller memory footprint, but they're both pretty small ;)

Chrome's meant to be quite a lightweight browser, but I've never done any tests on its memory footprint - might be worth a try.
 

BooDog47

Baseband Member
Messages
25
I prefer links. I'm not sure which has the smaller memory footprint, but they're both pretty small ;)

Chrome's meant to be quite a lightweight browser, but I've never done any tests on its memory footprint - might be worth a try.
Chrome is a resource hog. This is because it compensates not crashing for each individual tab using its own individual ram amounts. for example, if you have one tab for banking and one for online games, the game tab would be using the most ram whereas the banking would be using a lighter amount. regular browsers combine it all with a fixed amount of ram. that being said, chrome is only good on lower end computers if you only use a few tabs. as a recomendation, firefox has always gotten for the most part, the least amount of usage of resources.
 

Remeniz

Fully Optimized
Messages
3,390
Location
England
Chrome is a resource hog. This is because it compensates not crashing for each individual tab using its own individual ram amounts. for example, if you have one tab for banking and one for online games, the game tab would be using the most ram whereas the banking would be using a lighter amount. regular browsers combine it all with a fixed amount of ram. that being said, chrome is only good on lower end computers if you only use a few tabs. as a recomendation, firefox has always gotten for the most part, the least amount of usage of resources.
Mmmmm.

The more tabs I open in Opera and Firefox the more RAM they use.
 

dude_56013

Fully Optimized
Messages
4,262
I'm not sure how much RAM the browsers take, but you could install Linux on this computer. DamnSmallLinux or Puppy Linux would work well with that system. You could probably get by with something a little beefier if you wanted. I've run Ubuntu and Fedora or computers with ~same specs.
 

berry120

Fully Optimized
Messages
3,434
Location
UK
I'm not sure how much RAM the browsers take, but you could install Linux on this computer. DamnSmallLinux or Puppy Linux would work well with that system. You could probably get by with something a little beefier if you wanted. I've run Ubuntu and Fedora or computers with ~same specs.
Agreed, Ubuntu would be fine on a PC like that as would most linux distros - but what OS's would work and not is a WHOLE different board game ;)

Chrome is a resource hog. This is because it compensates not crashing for each individual tab using its own individual ram amounts. for example, if you have one tab for banking and one for online games, the game tab would be using the most ram whereas the banking would be using a lighter amount. regular browsers combine it all with a fixed amount of ram. that being said, chrome is only good on lower end computers if you only use a few tabs. as a recomendation, firefox has always gotten for the most part, the least amount of usage of resources.
Actually, a quick (non scientific) test I've just done looks like firefox uses more than Chrome for me, but I've got imacros and all sorts of extensions on here so that's not really a fair comparison.
What you're describing above is a multi process browser, which Chrome is. It works in seperate processes, so if one tab (process) goes down the others can still keep on running. It's the seperately scheduled processes that enable it to do this, not storing different bits of memory in different places! True you'll see individual processes using individual amounts of RAM when you run task manager or ps or something similar, but you seem to be directly equating this to resource hogging and bad design, which is quite simply wrong! While it's true that the inter process communication mechanisms in place within the application may use marginally more memory than one monolithic process, that doesn't make it a resource hog unless the application and the IPC mechanisms themselves have been badly designed. As pointed out already, on any conventional single threaded browser you'll notice the memory usage will go up and down depending on how many tabs you have open, and in many cases this will be more than the sum of all Chrome's processes.

I'm not necessarily arguing with the fact that Chrome is a resource hog (I haven't got the data necessary available to me to make an informed decision for myself) but you can't just equate multi-threaded design to using resources poorly.
 
Messages
7,841
Location
U.S.
I have ran Firefox, Chrome, and IE. I would suggest you run Chrome. From experience, I can tell you it uses the least amount of resources, even compared to a naked Firefox. I'm currently running Firefox, but that's only because I am constantly having to log into college application programs and for some reason they don't seem to work on Chrome.
 

Computear

Daemon Poster
Messages
675
Location
US
I have ran Firefox, Chrome, and IE. I would suggest you run Chrome. From experience, I can tell you it uses the least amount of resources, even compared to a naked Firefox. I'm currently running Firefox, but that's only because I am constantly having to log into college application programs and for some reason they don't seem to work on Chrome.
Same. I recently switched from Firefox to Chrome, but I still use Firefox as a secondary browser for certain things (Yahoo! Mail seems to act weird on Chrome for me, and my side work at kgb_ only works on Firefox).
 
Top