Comments on: Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong

By: Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong

Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:04:56 +0000

[...] Here is the original: Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong [...]

By: Firefox memory leaks? - Page 2

Firefox memory leaks? - Page 2 — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:57:12 +0000

[...] According to this test, firefox actually does remarkably well in the memory department. (If you are wondering why Chrome looks so bad in that test, read this) [...]

By: Abhinav

Abhinav — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:35:36 +0000

In Firefox too, Automatic RAM Cache is enabled by default.

By: Nathaniel Tucker

Nathaniel Tucker — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:03:16 +0000

Also, note the tests were done in Vista, yet Google cites Window XP. Why would they make such an obvious mistake?

By: Nathaniel Tucker

Nathaniel Tucker — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:01:50 +0000

FUD by Google. To quote http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=barrkel

“He is using Process.PrivateMemorySize64 in .NET. It doesn’t double-count, because it only counts non-shared pages.

Non-shared working set pages are probably the most relevant measure, as a process-per-tab model will have lots of address space and may use memory mapping extensively, and so have lots of non-shared pages, but not actually touch many of those pages, and end up with a relatively small working set. However, .NET’s Process class doesn’t have an equivalent property to Process Explorer’s “WS Private” column.

EDIT: Sure enough, a quick eyeball of some Chrome subprocesses using Process Explorer gives me these results:

Private WS Private
1416 460
14916 7952
12084 9780
16780 13972
16164 11336
14812 12040
10284 4444
19140 15400

All numbers in KB. Non-shared working set impact on an unloaded machine, probably the most important measure for Windows, is usually quite a bit less than the private bytes.”

By: Batalha entre os navegadores: Comparativo de utilização de memória | Info Dicas

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 20:30:32 +0000

[...] Via: Ghacks.net [...]

By: Rarst

Rarst — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 20:14:51 +0000

Spot on with Opera automatic settings! Turns out it uses extremely agressive memory cache by default – that’s why high figures.

Got me interested and I did my own test to compare:
http://www.rarst.net/software/browser-memory-benchmark/

By: Browser memory benchmark (plus lies and damn lies) | Rarst.net

Browser memory benchmark (plus lies and damn lies) | Rarst.net — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 20:11:28 +0000

[...] from Dot Net Perls is generating buzz (as such things do). I tried to stay away (as I do) but Martin’s post on discrepancies in it from incorrect measuring of multithreaded Chrome mentioned Opera memory consumption settings and [...]

By: Uso de la memoria en los navegadores. - Foros Softonic

Uso de la memoria en los navegadores. - Foros Softonic — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:38:18 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong - Computer Forums

Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong - Computer Forums — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:01:43 +0000

[...] Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong Source Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong Web browser memory usage might not be that much of an issue in these days with Gigabytes of [...]

By: Slashdot Technology Story | Memory…. Internet Explorer 8…. | Total Info

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 17:04:49 +0000

[...] A web browser memory usage comparison was recently posted a the Dot Net Pearls website that compared the memory usage of the Google browser Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Opera 10 and Safari. The web browsers were configureRead more at http://www.ghacks.net/2009/06/21/web-browser-memory-usage-benchmark-gets-it-all-wrong/ [...]

By: Rarst

Rarst — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 13:53:56 +0000

Biggest thing these test get wrong that there is different memory consumption.

1. Memory usage.
2. Memory leaks.

Memory usage is desirable. Memory is very very fast, it makes sense to make use of this resource. As noted in post Opera may reserve good chunk of memory just to have it ready.

Memory leaks are harmful. This is memory wasted because it was used but forgotten (and thus locked from further usage) afterwards.

Memory test can’t tell a difference between to so they make no sense. Except maybe generating buzz for publisher and marketing leverage for browsers.

By: Always show a vertical scrollbar…. qooxdoo » News »…. | Total Info

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:04:23 +0000

By: Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong « hung.TEXT

Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong « hung.TEXT — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 11:41:23 +0000

[...] Another aspect that needs to be mentioned is the test result of the Opera web browser. Opera is using an automatic setting called Automatic RAM Cache that is enabled by default. This allocated about 10% of the computer memory by default and should be disabled in memory benchmarks. Opera would most likely still have been beaten by Firefox but the gap would probably have been lower. via ghacks.net [...]

By: XkiD | Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong | blog.xkid.ro

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 11:27:06 +0000

[...] post: Web Browser Memory Usage Benchmark Gets It All Wrong Posted in News | Tags: affect-all, characteristics, computer-users, end-hardware-, [...]