Micha Feigin wrote: > > On the other hand, its still a crazy memory hog (almost 100MB with a single > window, that can not be good coding, its about as bad as explorer). I stick > with opera for the moment. > I heard that 1.5 was using more memory than 1.0.x because of the new feature of fast back and forward buttons. But I haven't tested those claims yet!
I tested firefox 1.5 (official linux) and Opera 8.51 with about 30 random websites(not really random but just as they came to my mind). At start Firefox used around 100MB and Opera about 40MB. Each of them used more memory with more number of sites visited which seems obvious as they are adding to the cache. Firefox settled at around 110MB of memory usage whereas Opera settled around 70MB. However, Opera's plugin wrapper also comes into play when needed and was using around 21MB of RAM and operaplugincleaner about 2MB. If you do the math, it comes out that firefox was using about 18% more RAM than opera! But this could be just me. Please contribute with your experiences. /ks PS: The test involved random websites typed in address bar of each browser and no links were clicked on the pages visited. Both browsers were tested with same websites and had only 1 window with 1tab open. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
