On BNET: Fix your remote like MacGyver
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

June 4th, 2008

Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?

Posted by Adrian Kingsley-Hughes @ 4:11 am

Categories: On the test bench, Software

Tags: Result, Mozilla Firefox 3.0, Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft Internet Explorer 7, Memory, Web Browser, Web Browsers, Internet, Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

This morning I came across an article on Neosmart claiming that Firefox 3.0 is, despite the best attempts of the Mozilla dev team, still a massive memory hog.

We’re sorry to have to break it to you, but if you thought it was too good to be true you were right. Firefox still uses a lot of memory – way too much memory for a web browser.

We haven’t seen it reach 1GiB+ like we have with previous versions, but it’s quite normal for Firefox 3 to be sucking up ~300MiB of memory right off the bat, without a memory leak (the difference between memory leaks and normal memory abusage is that in a memory leak you’ll see the memory usage keep increasing the longer the browser is open/in-use).

OK, time for some testing. Here’s what I did.

I took two identical VMware virtual PCs, both running Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 32-bit. The systems were given a meager 512Mb of RAM. I then took both browsers for a good two hour browsing session, visiting some of the Internet’s best “hot sheets” websites and loading up 30 tabs for each browser (remember, IE7 and Firefox 3.0 are running in different virtual machines).

Note: I tried to keep the browsing as similar as possible for both browsers.

The results are pretty dramatic and fly in the face of Neosmart’s findings. Here are a couple of screenshots after two hours of usage:

Internet Explorer 7

  • Memory usage: 319,260K
  • Total system: 436MB

IE7 IE7

Firefox 3.0 RC1

  • Memory usage: 159,168K
  • Total system: 376MB

Firefox 3.0 Firefox 3.0

Seems pretty clear to me which browser is the winner - and it isn’t Internet Explorer 7! Not only did IE7 consume more system resources, it made the system noticeably sluggish when running with 30 tabs loaded. Firefox 3.0 on the other hand felt fast and responsive throughout.

But this test does raise some interesting questions:

  • How much memory should a browser ideally consume?
  • Could the browsers be slimmed down? (Probably)
  • Does memory usage matter?

Thoughts?

Adrian Kingsley-HughesAdrian is a technology journalist and author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology. He also runs a popular blog called The PC Doctor. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations

Want to get in touch? Got a tip? Feel free to drop me a note! I ALWAYS respect anonymity. I'm also on Twitter (@the_pc_doc)

Right to Reply: Should any industry representatives wish to comment on any posts on Hardware 2.0, I will be happy to publish their reply verbatim on this blog.

Subscribe to Hardware 2.0 via Email alerts or RSS.

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 51 Talkback(s)
Probably because
IE is so tightly integrated into Windows, whereas FireFox isn't. Meaning that EVERYTHING FireFox does it has to do itself, whereas I'd say that some of IEs memory usage is hidden because it's other p... (Read the rest)
Posted by: TroyW Posted on: 08/10/08 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
Surely, like all programs, the answer is....  Zogg | 06/04/08
I agree...  BitTwiddler | 06/04/08
Ditto for cheap gas. That got us into an even bigger mess.  DonnieBoy | 06/04/08
Still, "what it needs" is not straight forward. Yes, there has bee a lot of  DonnieBoy | 06/04/08
Sometimes, the string is just too long happy.  Zogg | 06/04/08
Not a definitive answer just yet  davidcorley@... | 06/04/08
Safari? That's funny.  kjones@... | 06/04/08
This is really hard to guage since...  BitTwiddler | 06/04/08
Relevant for older computers. So...  pjotr123 | 06/04/08
agreed  vi0l3t1975@... | 06/04/08
firefox -safe-mode  D-T-Schmitz | 06/04/08
Which 3.0 did you use?  Roger Ramjet | 06/04/08
He was using...  Stuka | 06/04/08
nonsense  rtk | 06/04/08
Doesn't total memory matter?  FreewheelinFrank | 06/04/08
It does  luch3 | 06/04/08
Screenshots links crossed  msgclb | 06/04/08
I hate the beta  mudar | 06/04/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  Maarek | 06/04/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  msgclb | 06/04/08
Only two sizes  Yagotta B. Kidding | 06/04/08
Firefox 3 should've been smart and used MORE memory  seanwal111111 | 06/11/08
Compare IE8?  nucrash | 06/04/08
RE: Compare IE8?  msgclb | 06/04/08
Hundreds of MB does seem obscene to me  John L. Ries | 06/04/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  Computer Guru | 06/04/08
you should compare IE8 with FF3  qmlscycrajg | 06/04/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  Linux User 147560 | 06/04/08
Compare a bunch  BillDem | 06/04/08
FF3's memory usage is fine for me.  Stuka | 06/04/08
Who The HECK Uses IE7????  itanalyst2@... | 06/04/08
Enough, apparently...  superbus | 06/04/08
I use it more than FF  Ben_E | 06/05/08
I do  jackbond | 06/04/08
Too many do  tBuggR | 06/05/08
Where does Opera fit into this?  superbus | 06/04/08
Opera 9.5b2 is slick.  kraterz | 06/04/08
30 tabs loaded?  tonymcs@... | 06/04/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  Digitalcomet | 06/05/08
I find it funny...  Zorched | 06/05/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  clareJ | 06/05/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  notsofast | 06/05/08
Memory Usage  Kromaethius | 06/05/08
Neosmart never claimed in the article that IE7 is better...  transposeIT | 06/05/08
Adaptive memory profile?  Mitch 74 | 06/06/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  ThereThere | 06/11/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  TroyW | 06/11/08
3.0 is not a memory hog  Lerianis | 06/11/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  sanderson_111@... | 06/17/08
RE: Firefox 3.0 a memory hog?  johanne@... | 08/10/08
Probably because  TroyW | 08/10/08

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

Click Here
advertisement

Recent Entries

advertisement

Archives

ZDNet Blogs

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here