vinifera Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) Okay, I had a need to open topic like this, how will it end up... we'll seelong story short, I'm disgusted how these-day "modern" browsers eat RAM memory just for the sakes of itI have 2 putters, older one runs XP with 1 GB RAM, other has win7 with 3 GB RAMso I tried various (main) browsers excluding IE, to see resultsfor this basic test i took (this is not ad), this page: http://www.onemillionpicture.com/photo-albums.htmlmind you when you open every picture in new tab, pictures are SMALL (res) !!!- Firefox (new) on very start takes over 100 MB for no reason, when I opened 20 tabs, 800 MB was eaten- so I put SRware Iron (chrome), same pages, same amount of tabs (same links), even worse result, it hogged downPC to hell, no scrolling down was possible, mem usage over 800 MB*Opera 18/19 I won't comment since its dog crap and I don't even consider that thing a browser anymore- but since I am old Opera user, I tried the SAME links/pics/tabs on Opera 11.52, and behold the miracleit only ate 360 MB RAM------------------------------------------------now, I am not here to promote old Opera, I am here to simply show and tell how "modern" browserseat memory for no reason providing nothing in defensebut we can't simply revert to old ones, since many pages are either blocking themor they don't support CSS 3/HTML 5 to which people are transitioning now in web (tho slowly but it will come)and honestly I am p***ed off, I use old Opera 11.52 for daily browsing and Iron on pages like youtubewhere Opera is blocked or fails to load properlyso I googled on quick and found for now something called QtWeb, in short it is extra SMALL (not even 9MB installed)it has SMALL memory footprintI made same test like with other browsers here, same tabs/links, little guy ate only ~140 MB RAM(it is webkit based too)again this isn't advertising of neither browsers or pages, but I'd rather see what could others hererecommend as ALTERNATIVE to garbage that is hyped, and under this garbage I considerChrome, Firefox, Opera, IE (all new)are there any other browsers that utilise new web while not hogging down PC's ? Edited November 12, 2013 by vinifera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) I had never heard of the Qt Web browser ... just finished downloading and setting it up. I kind of like it so far. It is low on using resources. I use the following browsers with Qt Web browser just added:K-Meleon v1.6.0 beta 2.6 ... mem usage: 46 to 48 MBFirefox Portable v3.6.28 ... mem usage: 45 MBOpera Portable v11.64 ... mem usage: 45 MBQt Web v3.8.5 ... mem usage: 30 MBThose usage figures can change a little but since I mostly use K-Meleon with several tabs usually open ... I see the usage jump around more on that browser but always close in that range. This is on XP Pro SP3. I usually don't have a problem with web pages or sites (so far) but when I do run into something odd then one of the other browsers will usually work.I am using the Qt Web - Windows stand-alone portable executable version: QtWeb exe (7.5 MB)http://www.qtweb.net/http://www.qtweb.net/download.htmlcan be copied to CD, USB or other media to be run from directlydoes NOT create any shortcuts and folders (except for Downloads)does NOT include User Guide, however on-line Help can be usedportable version - user profiles not supported, settings and caches stored locallyWill see what others have to say on the subject. Edited November 12, 2013 by duffy98 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinifera Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 K-Meleon v1.6.0 beta 2.6 ... mem usage: 46 to 48 MBFirefox Portable v3.6.28 ... mem usage: 45 MBOpera Portable v11.64 ... mem usage: 45 MBproblem with these is that they are all outdatedthats why I opened this thread+add, I tried Midori and QupZilla, both webkit too and "lightweaight"Midori was unable to even install but portable one worked, but it wasn't stable at allwhile QupZilla even if advertised to be light, was same eating hog as normal chrome and even crashed to me (on that site #1)after 10 tabs opened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 I just noticed you are using Windows 7 while I am on XP. I was using the newer portable versions of Opera and Firefox but they were not working to my satisfaction so in early October I decided to give these "older" versions of Opera and Firefox a try after reading that others were still using these versions over the newer ones. I don't do Facebook or other related sites and I'm happy with these not so complicated "older" versions at this time. They seem fast and not bloated to me but Qt Web v3.8.5 is new and may be the one to use if the other browsers can't handle a certain web page. The older browsers just seem a little less complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripredacus Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 older one runs XP with 1 GB RAMYou really should have at least 2GB RAM on an XP PC that you want to go online with. CPU may also be a concern, you typically would want a multi-core or HT capable processor for best results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinifera Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 (edited) no offense, but optimized browsers like QtWeb prove that I don'tand not only that, it just proves how dev's today don't give a rats arse about optimizationsmost go "with the flow", expecting that everyone runs latest and bestXP on 1 GB runs just fine, any game and/or app runs just fine (naturally not bloated ones)try adding only 3 plugins to chrome/iron, on very start you will have each plugin to eat exactlythe same RAM as the original browser process, for what ? - do they run 3 more browser instances ?shouldn't plugin be a plugin ?!! - a small side process with low consuption !why does plugin that only adds a button to toolbar eat 100 MB RAM ?did people missed period when such small irrelevant things supposed to take few kb or 1 MB at most ? Edited November 12, 2013 by vinifera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasz86 Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 This QtWeb browser looks really promising. I use Firefox as my main browser on Windows desktop (quad-core CPU, 4GB RAM, SSD) and it's usable although I can't say I like it. Still, it's probably the best out of the worst. On Android I prefer to use Opera Mini / Opera Mobile Classic since its UI is very light and fast compared to the alternatives, and I can use Opera Link to synchronise Speed Dial and bookmarks between different devices. And due to a limited data plan I rely on the Opera's data compression very heavily. The real problem is my laptop (Pentium III-M 933MHz, 640MB RAM, 5400rpm HDD). All mainstream browsers perform horrible on it. It's not only about how much RAM they use but also extreme CPU usage which makes the whole system unusable. At the moment I'm using Opera 12.x which seems to work way better than Firefox / Chromium on such an old hardware but I'll probably switch to QtWeb from now... This is my only laptop and I need to use it quite often so thank you for very much for this very useful information Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponch Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 PaleMoon, SlimBoat, SeaMonkey, you can find some here. You test them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 (edited) tomasz86 ... read your comment on the Qt Web browser. After you use it for awhile or test with it, I'd be interested in your comments or final verdict. Seems to be an OK browser so far for me.... Edited November 14, 2013 by duffy98 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinifera Posted November 14, 2013 Author Share Posted November 14, 2013 PaleMoon, SlimBoat, SeaMonkey, you can find some here. You test them.thanks Ponch, will do ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasz86 Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 tomasz86 ... read your comment on the Qt Web browser. After you use it for awhile or test with it, I'd be interested in your comments or final verdict. Seems to be an OK browser so far for me. ... It's been just a few days so I've got no definite opinion on QtWeb yet but this is what I can say at the moment:Speed is very impressive.HTML5 / CSS3 supports seems to be decent but not perfect, ex. uploading images through drag & drop doesn't work in Imgur.Changing browser identification seems to be a must as fonts are broken on some websites. There's a compatibility option and I've set it to Firefox:Identified as QtWeb:Identified as Firefox:The built-in AdBlock seems to do the job pretty well.There are some UI glitches when system DPI is non-standard, ex. but nothing serious.The whole browsing experience feels kind of choppy as there's no smooth scrolling, loading animations on websites are static, etc. but this is a good thing if you think about pure speed, RAM usage and overall optimisation More to come later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 I like the Qt Web browser ... haven't used it as much as I would like. K-Meleon works OK most of the time but I just spent the last hour using the QT Web browser ... it's really a good browser ... very fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasz86 Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 (edited) One more browser to try:http://www.slimboat.com (more details here)Also small and fast but contrary to QtWeb not open-source (just freeware). And in my system it seems to be much heavier on the CPU (while the RAM usage is similar to QtWeb) Edited November 24, 2013 by tomasz86 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now