Thorium

[Dixel]

optional

--disable-low-res-tiling

--wm-window-animations-disabled

--disable-highres-timer (I like it, but you wrote it's somehow not fitting for XP 32bit).

[Dave-H]

9 hours ago, Dixel said:

optional

--disable-low-res-tiling

--wm-window-animations-disabled

--disable-highres-timer (I like it, but you wrote it's somehow not fitting for XP 32bit).

 

9 hours ago, Dixel said:

first and foremost: --process-per-site

second: --enable-rgba-4444-textures (allow to use more simplistic textures), as I suspect the problem might be the images (their size) that Chrome converts to raw from jpeg.

They wrote about that glitch in Supermium on github, too.

Thanks, I might play with those later.
I'm not actually too worried about this, it doesn't make the sites unusable.
Now I know why it's happening I can live with it, I was just puzzled as to why things had changed, now I know!
It appears that I could go back to using uBlock Origin on Thorium and Supermium, but that might cause issues with the syncing of extensions with Google Chrome on my Windows 10, where I'm soon going to have to use uBlock Origin Lite, but I'll see how it goes. I know I can disable the syncing of extensions, but I actually think it's a useful feature.

[Dixel]

18 hours ago, Dave-H said:

Thanks, I might play with those later.

You're welcome! --process-per-site is very important since it consolidates all numerous processes from a given website into one, hence the memory usage reduction. I posted this flag at MSFN several years ago, I remember VistaLover was confusing it with another flag --site-per-process, they are absolutely different. Seeing the memory leaks are starting to show them off literally on every site now, I indeed think, try it.

Out of Memory - Google Maps, then Crash.

https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/847

[UCyborg]

8 hours ago, Dave-H said:

It appears that I could go back to using uBlock Origin on Thorium and Supermium, but that might cause issues with the syncing of extensions with Google Chrome on my Windows 10, where I'm soon going to have to use uBlock Origin Lite, but I'll see how it goes. I know I can disable the syncing of extensions, but I actually think it's a useful feature.

I don't think there's anything wrong with using Thorium or Supermium on Win10 if one likes either of these browsers. I haven't installed plain Google Chrome in years.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

I agree.  That's why I continue to monitor them closely.  I will need for either or to be FULLY UNGOOGLED before I switch to it full-time.

I don't use "plain Google Chrome" either.  For me, as already noted, I use UNGOOGLED.  v122 is my default at the moment.  Only because my bank won't let me log in with v114.

It's unfortunate, IMO, that we don't have a v114 ESR!

Edited September 3, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames

[NotHereToPlayGames]

56 minutes ago, Dixel said:

--process-per-site is very important

I just tried this one and saw no difference.  I'd be interested in additional feedback.

For me, I compared (as most will guess) Speedometer 2.1 scores.  No difference.  And two YouTube tabs, one playing music, the second just for searching.  No RAM difference for sum of all chrome processes (I didn't count actual number of processes).

56 minutes ago, Dixel said:

--site-per-process, they are absolutely different

If I remember correctly, this one breaks Cloudflare.

Edited September 3, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames

[Dixel]

11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

--site-per-process, If I remember correctly, this one breaks Cloudflare.

It very well may be, it's a security flag that isolates site's processes, but I didn't suggest it.

[Dixel]

11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I just tried this one and saw no difference.  I'd be interested in additional feedback.

For me, I compared (as most will guess) Speedometer 2.1 scores.  No difference.  And two YouTube tabs, one playing music, the second just for searching.  No difference.

 

Screenshots? BTW, like I wrote, it's about the overall memory consumption, NOT speed.

[Dixel]

11 hours ago, UCyborg said:

I don't think there's anything wrong with using Thorium or Supermium on Win10 if one likes either of these browsers. I haven't installed plain Google Chrome in years.

Same here! I use a China fork that has no memory leaks. I wrote to win32 with the suggestion to use it as the base for his browser, but he didn't open the message. Strange because he always reads my messages and responds.

[Dixel]

11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Only because my bank won't let me log in with v114.

It's unfortunate, IMO, that we don't have a v114 ESR!

I'm lost, why would you need a version with which the bank won't let you in? Besides, it's obsolete. I just tried it. It's 1.5 years old. I can't shop with it.

 

[NotHereToPlayGames]

7 minutes ago, Dixel said:

I'm lost, why would you need a version with which the bank won't let you in?

My hunch, can't prove or disprove, would be that my bank WOULD ALLOW a login if v114 was an ESR as it would contain the "security fixes" they deem 'required'.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

But as far as that goes, I never could isolate WHY my bank works for v122 thru v124.  ONLY.

I cannot use v121 or OLDER.  And, more importantly, I cannot use anything NEWER than v124.

The users of BRAVE also cite the same issue.  I follow their forum just for this one issue.

"Real" Chrome (ie, not the Ungoogled or the Brave) works fine for every version from v109 all the way through v128.

It's something with Ungoogled and with Brave but v122 thru v124 is fine.  It's a mystery that I shall leave for the BRAVE folks to isolate further.

[Dixel]

11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

My hunch, can't prove or disprove, would be that my bank WOULD ALLOW a login if v114 was an ESR as it would contain the "security fixes" they deem 'required'.

It doesn't matter anyways, a couple of months further, and you won't be able to do more and more things with it. Don't dwell on old browsers, I'm not a fan of upgrading, as you may know, but 1.5 years is the upper sane limit.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

20 minutes ago, Dixel said:

Screenshots?

Sure.  But I will only spend that time if you can show screencaps of where you see a benefit.  I know what I saw and I'm not the one claiming this switch to be useful.  I'll call that "fair game" and the ball is in your court.  

[Dixel]

11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

It's something with Ungoogled and with Brave but v122 thru v124 is fine.  It's a mystery that I shall leave for the BRAVE folks to isolate further.

Brave claims they are Ungoogled. Google telemetry removed, Brave telemetry added.