Gizmo's Freeware Forum - View Single Post

Ritho · 12. Mar 2010, 10:50 AM

Firefox has that feature too. If you right click a bookmark folder you have the choice to "open all in tabs."

Seeing how many tabs I could have open at once sounded interesting so...

System Specs:
OS: Linux Mint 8
Memory: 4GB
Processor: AMD Phenom 9850 Quad-Core
Browser: Firefox 3.6

I got 104 unique sites to open without system instability. Firefox was only using around 700MB of ram. I could have probably gotten a few more tabs to open, but with each successive tab I opened I was taking longer and longer to open. So RAM was not the problem, but my processor was maxing out. Each core was jumping between 10% to 100% usage in succession so the graph for the cpu looked like the Himalayas.

I am sure if you were to open fairly innocuous webpages, without any dynamic content or such, you could get a lot more to load than those pages with lots of flash banners or other jazz.

I was fairly pleased with the performance of Firefox 3.6. I don't think 3.5 would have performed nearly as well. I imagine I would not get anywhere near 104 in Windows, with amongst other things Firefox's memory leaks.

An interesting outcome of this was that I clicked Firefox's option to close all the tabs but one, and the browser crashed after closing about half. Then when I restarted Firefox, it referenced its cache and began to reopen all 104 tabs again!

12. Mar 2010, 10:50 AM	#4 (permalink)
Ritho Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Planet Earth Posts: 1,379	Firefox has that feature too. If you right click a bookmark folder you have the choice to "open all in tabs." Seeing how many tabs I could have open at once sounded interesting so... System Specs: OS: Linux Mint 8 Memory: 4GB Processor: AMD Phenom 9850 Quad-Core Browser: Firefox 3.6 I got 104 unique sites to open without system instability. Firefox was only using around 700MB of ram. I could have probably gotten a few more tabs to open, but with each successive tab I opened I was taking longer and longer to open. So RAM was not the problem, but my processor was maxing out. Each core was jumping between 10% to 100% usage in succession so the graph for the cpu looked like the Himalayas. I am sure if you were to open fairly innocuous webpages, without any dynamic content or such, you could get a lot more to load than those pages with lots of flash banners or other jazz. I was fairly pleased with the performance of Firefox 3.6. I don't think 3.5 would have performed nearly as well. I imagine I would not get anywhere near 104 in Windows, with amongst other things Firefox's memory leaks. An interesting outcome of this was that I clicked Firefox's option to close all the tabs but one, and the browser crashed after closing about half. Then when I restarted Firefox, it referenced its cache and began to reopen all 104 tabs again! __________________ The smallest good deed is better than the greatest intention.