Firefox losing to Chrome: And here's why

Well of course it's better in the sense that a crash wouldn't lose all your work but that is a separate discussion in and of itself. It has no bearing on running an experiment within certain defined conditions. You want to check the resource usage of both browsers in the same manner without injecting any kind of bias into the experiment, which you are effectively doing by allowing Chrome to run differently than Firefox throughout the course of your test.

It's like if you wanted to compare the time it takes for a fast car and a slow car to complete one lap. Would you give the slow car a head start simply because it's slower than the fast car? Same concept here.

 

All in all, I think it's unfair to test and compare Firefox and Chrome, especially right now. Firefox has been around for some time now where as Chrome a few months. Not to mention Chrome is still in beta. They are two completely different web browsers, different rendering engine, different design, different features, etc.
It would be more viable and fair to compare the two once Chrome develops more and finishes all that it wants to do(add-ons, cross-platform support, etc.) Once Chrome finishes adding add-on support and others, its resource usage will go up. No point in comparing ram usage for now.
You guys are comparing a pretty much finished and established browser to a new and unfinished browser, it's just not fair to compare the two right now.

 

If you want a GoogleUpdate.exe free Chrome experience, you can always try Iron. Here's the link: http://www.downloadsquad.com/2008/09/24/iron-chrome-for-privacy-fanatics/

There are already addons for Chrome.. but the only one that is absolutely essential that is missing is AdBlock. I don't want to install a secondary program.. but once an adblock comes out I'll be set.

 

This is very true. I probably won't be touching Chrome till it comes out of beta. Google is infamous for their never ending beta stages though so I wonder how long I'll be waiting before I eventually give in

 

It doesn't. Chrome doesn't support Stumble Upon. There is a way, and here's the link:

http://www.bloggingindia.net/2008/10/03/stumble-it-for-google-chrome/

 

Cool. I'd use that before I'd use Chrome.

 

Now all I need is a program to remove all the stuff Chrome installs and doesn't remove. A Chrome cleaner program would be really nice, before installing Iron.

 

You can do that manually after using RevoUninstaller to uninstall it. Just delete the folder in Appdata. and check the registry for leftover keys.

 

Google is the governments way of spying on us with our permission. Secret plot, yada yada.

I still like FF better. Sorry chrome, your data mining is annoying.

 

It's not like they don't collect enough data already.. you know, Google Search, Gmail, Google Docs...

If you don't like its data mining, Iron removes it, I'm pretty sure.

 

Does chrome have autofill, noscript, ad block, a bookmark tool bar and ie tab? if so I may think about using it.

 

It's still way faster than Firefox and under the circumstances that I am in(campus server), I'll risk it.

 

Of all that, it only has a bookmark toolbar. You can use a program called Privoxy to block ads.

 

BS! Google chrome takes up more mem.



Why does google have 3 operations running with only 1 browser opened?

And to make things fair, I had both browser sitting idling at google.com.

Other people tried to trick us by having chrome idle on google.com and firefox idle loading clips on youtube.com.

The combined memory usuage of chrome is more than firefox.

Google taking up 30,568k.
Firefox taking just 20k

 

Thanks. I have 2 Gig of RAM so I'm not all that worried about memory usage. I can us IE tab to switch to the few websites that don't work well with FF.

How's chrome work in that regard?

 

Well here I am near the end of the day. I have had Chrome and FF3 running all day. Each browser has had the 3 same pages open. Low and behold look at this, lol.

Chrome = 78,800 + 8912 (missed it) = 87,712
FF3 = 74,148



Edit: Missed one more Chrome process, sorry.

 

exactly as i posted earlier. Google tried to trick you by have 20000 separate proceesses.. Fool me once...

 

I posted something similar earlier but there was a comment about FF3 using more memory as the day went on. So I left them open all day to test this theory, no such issue on my system.

Edit: Dam! I even missed one Chrome process! That means Chrome is WAY over FF3.

 

I see. I'll stick with firefox. Not feeling chrome at the moment and uninstalled it. I can't see why it needs to have 4+ processes..

 

I as well never had a problem with firefox. I love the addon and take full advantage of some (the media player which i don't need windows media player i close windows media player and one of my favorites the weather one which tells me how the weather is today and 2 days in advance no need to go to a website or install some program to check the weather along with many other addons). Firefox to me has been amazing and like i said no lag issue runs fast and smooth. I haven't used chrome though nor I intend. Unless firefox becomes like IE than I will give a try to chrome.

 

Wow! I am a FF user from way back and just passed up Chrome as googles attempt to get into a bigger market. Well im impressed. Its pretty quick especially on my P4...

 

then why is chrome faster than firefox then?

 

i think chrome is great and much faster than FF, but heres why i dont use it:

- not being able to place bookmarks on the side.
-not having an adblock feature like in FF.

Chrome needs add ons like in FF and then i'll switch.

 

How can I get a home icon or something like it? I can't believe there isn't one already.

I have to type my homepage in! Thats a lot of work...

 

I'm guessing add-ons and just being an overall bigger program maybe?

This is my nub guess.

 

Click on the wrench in the top right and go to: Options > Basic > HomePage > select the box: Show Home Button on the toolbar

 

dude this is insane!!!! I just downloaded it thanks to this thread check this:

while running 7 sites on firefox and chrome respectively firefox uses 225,000 kbs while Chrome only uses 100,000 kbs or 225mb to 100mb this is insane now i know what im using while playing games oh also its weird im runnin internet explorer as well and it is running 8 sites but it is using about 350 mbs IE is a real resource hog

 

Information about multithreads: http://thechromegoogler.com/2008/09/multithreading-technology-in-chrome/

(http://www.reviewfaq.com/Tools-|-Templates/Google-Chrome-Preview.html):

Multithreading - "this is going to make a huge difference to page load speed. The loading of page elements in browsers is currently sequential and that can really slow things down, especially when there's a lot of script on the page (like, er, Adsense). It's a bit like comparing an old cassette tape with a CD - with the tape you have to start right at the beginning and fast forward to find what you want; with the CD you just go there. Multithreading is a really big step forward (like the first time I used GoFTP after a life time with Cute, but that's a whole other story) and I think is going to be the single biggest USP of this new browser."

Multiple Sessions and Process Isolation - "you know that horrible feeling when you've got 20 Firefox tabs going and then you open THAT page, the one that never finishes loading, that just sits there and locks up the whole app. Well, say goodbye to those crap page blues with Chrome's new process isolation which means that each site loads in its own unique Chrome session - if one particular page gives you a problem you can just shut it down without affecting the others. No more hard crashes.

One other advantage of Process Isolation is that you no longer see the gradual memory bloat of Firefox the longer you leave it open. Keep Firefox open with a couple dozen tabs running for a few days and you'll see the memory usage inexorably rise over the period, to the point where the app will frequently lock up. That's due to memory fragmentation and is a direct result of having all the tabs running in a single session. Multiple Session processing means that as you close a tab, the whole of that particular session finishes, giving up the full amount of memory to the next process. The new Chrome Task Manager even shows you which tabs are the worst offenders, meaning you can ditch the real memory hogs as quickly as possible."

 

No, it's because of the rendering engine Chrome uses. Webkit is faster than Gecko atm.

 

Memory consumption is one good resource consumption indicator, but it doesn't necessarily reflect on the program’s responsiveness.

 

Two things.

One. Garandhero, you need to give it up.

Two. Chrome's multi-process model certainly hasn't helped me in the multiple times it has frozen up. I know, I know - its new, its beta, yadda yadda. But Phoenix was more stable and more functional than what it replaced. Not the case for Chrome at this point.

 

I will look at Chrome when is is no longer beta. Just like I will look at IE8 when it is no longer beta.

I for one am getting very tired of buggy beta software being passed off as ready for prime time. Either make it real or give it up. All this does is lower our expectations. I recall when we expected things to work, but then I am older than most of you, too.

 

Wow. This is a huge thread. I'm going to be honest: I did not just waste half an hour reading the last 5 pages.

However, I wanted to post a link to this article. Clearly, Firefox is not losing market share to Chrome. In fact, quite the opposite it occuring. Granted, this is two separate events taking place (1) Firefox is expanding, but is taking market share from IE, not from Chrome necessarily, (2) Chrome's initial hype is wearing off. This is just the truth.

Here's a excerpt for those too lazy to read.

 

Are there really still those websites? I have not found one in over 5 years that will not work with Firefox.

 

You obviously have never visited a Microsoft site in over 5 years. If you use Windows XP, Windows Update can be ran via IE Tab. Microsoft.com actually doesn't not render completely correctly on Firefox. I assume this is because Microsoft is using some proprietary IE hacks that any open source browser would be insane to try and conform to.

 

What's with the winning and losing? The thread was only at Page 1 yesterday.

Nocturnal310's title might sound too general but he might not mean it or just as he did question his own statement by asking if there's any add-on for Chrome. His intention is, I believe, positive.

So my dear FF or Chrome's Fan, you don't need to jump out so quickly to defend your beloved browser by sentence all the opposite opinion to death.

As I said earlier, most of the built-in functions that done by Chrome can be achieve by FF add-on, except the multi-threading.

And here I'm strongly agree with anyone who made the statement of Chrome, as a barebone browser (In most case), direct comparison to FF shall not be made as in some people case, loaded with lots of add-ons.

Overall, there's people out there who feel FF's add-on made their life easier and also people who don't. Just use the browser that suit your taste and you don't need to start a fight by comparing the weight of a M4 (Which does it job) with a M4 fully loaded with add-on (Which also does it job).

 

I have had no problems at all with microsoft.com using Firefox.

And I use Control Panel/Windows Update in Vista, which works without overtly going into any browser.

 

Excuse me, I just checked Microsoft.com and it does indeed work with Firefox. I do remember about 3 months ago that this was not the case, however. (Microsoft seems to be learning something. This is good. )

 

You're missing the point entirely then. By all day, I mean under normal usage. Memory usage doesn't grow over time if you just let loaded web pages sit there.. that doesn't make any sense.

Chrome may or may not use more RAM if it has the same tabs open as Firefox. However, if you were to close some of those tabs or go to different websites (which is what I meant by normal usage..), over time, Firefox's memory usage will grow, while Chrome's won't.

Clearly you read the title, but not ANY of the thread. Basically the OP was trying to show how Firefox uses more memory than Chrome. Then other people showed it didn't. Then others showed it did.

To sum things up: Chrome may or may not use more RAM. Depends on how it feels that day.

 

Amen.

Considering I love my StumbleUpon addon, it makes FF more fun for me, and as far as I know, Mozilla isn't going to stop developing FF.

Hey, whatever works for you right?

 

Opera is superior to both FF and Chrome in many ways. Though in a sense we are only talking about a "web browser" not life&death.

 

One thing i dont like about the chrome is the most visted sites when you open chrome..Does anyone know how to get rid of it??

 

Honest question, how?

 

Change your homepage in the settings...

 

Opera is faster than FF, but not compared to Chrome. It has more functions compared to chrome but not compared to FF. Therefore I wouldn't call it superior in many ways, perhaps in someways..... but Opera is far from a perfect browser, it has it's own share of rendering and compatibility bugs, which are more annoying than performance related issues of FF.

 

how it is better than :

FF:
-far less buggy ( no random crashes, ie older java script)
-much less laggier in the scroll, FF is VERY laggy in response to scrolling
-FARRRRRRR less processing usage than FF, this is a rather huge issue with those that have less than 1gb ram.
-faster opening from cold start, faster page loads

Chrome (actually a very good browser) but still buggy
- faster page loads
- man,MANY more options/plugins than Chrome
- Chromes Auto-start GOOGLE updater (can interfere with online gaming)
- easy of use - chrome is so easy, in a sense its harder to use at it has far less options.
- google search is built into web address bar, which is awful, especially for those who, are tab users.
- Security issues in-so-far as personal privacy on a local machine ( IE people view your visited webpages when tabbed).

Just a few nit picks, though all 3 are good browsers, at this point Opera is just superior, much like a Toyota over a Ford in reliabilty.

 

I've been experiencing many problems using Firefox since 2.0. I might just try Chrome and maybe switch to. From what I've heard so far, people using it seem to be very satisfied.

 

Autofill Yes, no script Yes, ad block (if thats a brand) no, but it has its own popup blocking system thats really quite nice... ps what browswer doesnt have popup/ad block standard now?

ie tab?

bookmark toolbar yes, seriously just try it it rocks.

 

wrong.. it blocks ads and popups for me.. maybe u have virus !)!:!: ??F

 

again so if it crashes each proccess/tab is seperate and u dont lose everything. its intentional.