08/12/2010 06:46, Miles Bader wrote: > Camaleón <noela...@gmail.com> writes: >> Mozilla products are memory/CPU hogs, yes. I hope newer versions can >> correct that. > > I find that chromium actually seems to use _more_ memory for a given > amount of content. > > However with chromium it's really easy to reduce the usage by closing > tabs; with FF (etc) that doesn't work. > > -Miles >
I have the same experience, since I read this thread I did a bit of testing with Chromium and Iceweasel from squeeze and experimental. Most of the time memory use is a bit lower with chromium though, but it uses more ram when loading content. Also when looking at chromium ram usage top isn't the right tool, chromium starts many threads (that's one of it's core feature) so using something like "smem" and comparing RSS values might be more accurate (I used "smem -tkP [c]hromium", adding "-m" option to have a closer look at extensions memory use). But even looking at the whole session memory usage there isn't a big difference here (kde, cold start with empty session, only one browser started, same tabs for each browser, changing tabs content after a few try). Also did tests with a few extensions that perform the same duty in each browser (like ad-blocking, flash blocking, session and cookies management), I couldn't see a major difference between the two. Chromium does load content a bit faster most of the time, but uses more memory to do so. Caching is about the same for the two browsers. No memory leak in sight with any of these two, even after a full day, both give memory back when closed equally but Chromium gives some back when in use (closing tabs, loading less "intensive" content...), iceweasel only gives back smaller amounts in the same situations. Iceweasel memory usage is more "flat" during browsing sessions when chromium is adjusting better. Overall chromium has a small edge, but not very noticeable here. I use both happily anyway ! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cff4554.6050...@googlemail.com
