View Single Post
Old 12. Mar 2010, 11:53 AM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
Ritho's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,379

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.
Well I stuck my foot in my mouth. My apologies to Windows XP! 379 tabs open. RAM in use by Firefox was over 1200MB Paging file at around 950 MB. The CPU performed much better under Windows at an average of only 25%. That got me to wondering about the quality of drivers or support for the quad core on Linux.

I loaded all my bookmarks 182 for unique sites, then needed more pages so I loaded all the 197 pages from our RSS feed. (That should boost our traffic a bit around here ) I think I could have loaded a lot more, but was running out of bookmarks. I also have FF3.6 on Windows, and I looked like the memory was leaking a bit so I don't know how long the system would have remained stable had I left it sit for a while. I was impressed though.
The smallest good deed is better than the greatest intention.
Ritho is offline   Reply With Quote