Gizmos Freeware Reviews  

Go Back   Gizmo's Freeware Forum > Debating Chamber > Internet, Web Apps and Networking

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10. Oct 2018, 02:26 PM   #1 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Melita-s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 636
Default Is Firefox Qantum Faster

To my surprise, I found Firefox Quantum much slower to load than the Legacy version, on the same computer with Windows 7. Has anyone had the same experience?

Thank you
__________________
Melita
Melita-s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10. Oct 2018, 04:16 PM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 149
Default

Melita,

My experience has been just the opposite - very fast, much to my surprise, even in Sandboxie.

In fact, I tried Slimjet a few weeks ago to see how a Chrome-derivative browser stacks up, Quantum is still faster. I had never used anything Chrome related before, this was also a surprise.

However, I have had so many other issues with Quantum since V60...

I gave up on anything related to bookmarks, moved every bookmark out of Firefox into a nifty app called Bookmark OS, and into Word files, believe it or not.

The issues with connection are also problematic. It runs in cycles, I never know why. This morning has been a nightmare connecting to even major sites.

I have fewer extensions now. Some of the replacements I tried were badly coded and caused issues.

I find using Waterfox or Pale Moon the occasional times I do to be very slow and difficult; wouldn't consider going back.

I fear that they are going to deprecate functionality over time because the kids don't find things like bookmarks to be useful and the fact that everything seems to be developed for mobile first.

V60.xx - 61.xx were nightmares until i just gave up. I deleted any trace of Firefox and started over with a fresh install of 62, I mean I deleted everything, because I could never solve any of the issues I had.

I just ran Slimjet for about a month until 62 was released. So far, so good.
windyctyprog is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10. Oct 2018, 04:51 PM   #3 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
Anupam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: India
Posts: 15,232
Default

Firefox Quantum is definitely faster for me.
__________________
Anupam
Anupam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10. Oct 2018, 08:10 PM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Melita-s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anupam View Post
Firefox Quantum is definitely faster for me.
My problem must be something at this end then. I also had the connectivity problem even with major sites. For the moment at least, I will stay with Legacy ESR. Thank you for all the information
__________________
Melita
Melita-s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11. Oct 2018, 03:21 AM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
danielson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,015
Default

Faster at boot?
-bah.

Faster at page rendering?
-debatable.

Faster at losing users?
-oops!

ESR is probably best.
Do find Firefox to be generally faster on Linux.
danielson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11. Oct 2018, 02:04 PM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
danielson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,015
Default

Once upon a time, there used to be an extension to check add-on memory usage...

For whatever reason, Firefox is using over 1.5G of RAM
while Vivaldi barely .55
Albeit, don't have as many extensions on Vivaldi but, who or what can tell me which ones on Firefox are using up all the resources?

- - - - -

Windows Pro 64bit
danielson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11. Oct 2018, 04:40 PM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Melita-s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danielson View Post
Once upon a time, there used to be an extension to check add-on memory usage...

For whatever reason, Firefox is using over 1.5G of RAM
while Vivaldi barely .55
Albeit, don't have as many extensions on Vivaldi but, who or what can tell me which ones on Firefox are using up all the resources?

Windows Pro 64bit
I would also like to know about this please
__________________
Melita
Melita-s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12. Oct 2018, 06:32 AM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
EldonW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Port Elizabeth, South Africa
Posts: 244
Default

You could manually check the RAM usage of add-ons (I know it's not ideal).
https://www.technorms.com/35188/disc...he-most-memory

This extension unfortunately doesn't support Firefox Quantum.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir...dl-upandcoming
EldonW is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12. Oct 2018, 02:17 PM   #9 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
danielson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,015
Default

Since my previous post have...
1. tested Slimjet loaded with many extensions (still under .5G of RAM usage);
2. created new Firefox profile with no extensions, no bookmarks, with 5 tabs open and one with a Youtube playing and it floated from initial .450 or so to .580G in the span of two minutes.
So... the proof is there! Firefox with blessed Quantum does not make their "safer" extensions better than before as they promised.

Did however notice a faster Firefox to load and page render.

Last edited by danielson; 12. Oct 2018 at 02:29 PM. Reason: A few touch ups
danielson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13. Oct 2018, 06:21 PM   #10 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
danielson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,015
Default

Disabling Adguard has cut RAM usage by about 1/2.
danielson is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.