Any reason to use Chrome over FF?

[SunSamurai]

Right now I have 10 tabs open in firefox and it is only using 113 MB of ram. I left it open overnight and ram usage did go above that.

Sure but you forgot the main issue here...

Its that no one gives a shit about what you have to say. Shut up.

 

[pcslookout]

Sure but you forgot the main issue here...

Its that no one gives a shit about what you have to say. Shut up.

I don't care what you have to say either. Guess you don't care what Nothinman has to say huh ?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=29675362&postcount=18

 

[ch33zw1z]

Chrome has crashed on me before as has Firefox. They all have. Just Opera is quicker for slower pcs.

Yeah I know what your talking about with firefox going to 500 MB used with only one tab open and leaving it open it goes all the way to 1.5 GB lol. That is when my crashes. The thing you don't understand is this problem is not caused by "Firefox". If you would of done tests trying to fix the problem everyone would see this. It can be different for everyone because Firefox is very customizable.

I can get chrome and internet explorer to have the same problem. Tried it.

The only "test" I did was reinstalling it after first having issues. When it went to 1.5GB that's when I said F it. The thing you don't understand is based on your posting history, I don't care what you think I don't understand. And BTW, after I reinstalled FF I had no plugins installed...so running plain ole FF still gave me that 1.5GB issue.

So far neither Chrome, IE, or Opera leaked that amount of memory ever on any of my machines. That's not to say that won't someday...but haven't yet.

 

[pcslookout]

The only "test" I did was reinstalling it after first having issues. When it went to 1.5GB that's when I said F it. The thing you don't understand is based on your posting history, I don't care what you think I don't understand. And BTW, after I reinstalled FF I had no plugins installed...so running plain ole FF still gave me that 1.5GB issue.

So far neither Chrome, IE, or Opera leaked that amount of memory ever on any of my machines. That's not to say that won't someday...but haven't yet.

What about other stuff like flash player ?

 

[ch33zw1z]

What about other stuff like flash player ?

What about it? I'm sure it was installed after the FF reinstall, but keep in mind it's installed for Chrome and IE with no issues. Not my problem if FF can't handle it...I moved on and posted my scenario in this related thread.

 

[SaDiZTiKStyLeZ]

Netflix works just fine in Chrome.

Gave NF:IW a try on Chrome, but have found it performs worse than FF. Watched about 5 episodes of X-Files. Been regularly getting lags in video alot more than FF, at least one for about 20sec+ each episode. Most issues I come across when watching movies off NF is something wrong in the rip itself, but was able to go back and watch through the part that was lagging.

 

[sourceninja]

The only "test" I did was reinstalling it after first having issues. When it went to 1.5GB that's when I said F it. The thing you don't understand is based on your posting history, I don't care what you think I don't understand. And BTW, after I reinstalled FF I had no plugins installed...so running plain ole FF still gave me that 1.5GB issue.

So far neither Chrome, IE, or Opera leaked that amount of memory ever on any of my machines. That's not to say that won't someday...but haven't yet.

I have found some pages in chrome do cause it to 'run away' with my ram. Last night I had chrome lock up to find out it was using about 300 megs of ram with only 1 tab open. But for the most part I have no issues.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Gave NF:IW a try on Chrome, but have found it performs worse than FF. Watched about 5 episodes of X-Files. Been regularly getting lags in video alot more than FF, at least one for about 20sec+ each episode. Most issues I come across when watching movies off NF is something wrong in the rip itself, but was able to go back and watch through the part that was lagging.

Crappy, what hardware are you running? I haven't had any problems with Netflix:IW in either Chrome or FF that wasn't a network issue on my end or theirs. My specs:

Q9550
Asus P5K 'nilla
4x1GB Corsair DDR2-800
WD 640GB Black

OS: XP @ SP3

 

[pcslookout]

I have found some pages in chrome do cause it to 'run away' with my ram. Last night I had chrome lock up to find out it was using about 300 megs of ram with only 1 tab open. But for the most part I have no issues.

Yep I seen the exact same thing with chrome. The advantage you can close as that one process that is running away with ram to get it back quickly without restarting your browser. Firefox will soon have where each tab has its own process too. Will be a much needed feature. The only other browser that doesn't have this yet is Opera. Shouldn't be to long until firefox gets the feature hopefully.

I can easily get chrome to use 400 to 600 MB + of ram in just a few minutes as well.

 

[lxskllr]

Firefox will soon have where each tab has its own process too. Will be a much needed feature. The only other browser that doesn't have this yet is Opera. Shouldn't be to long until firefox gets the feature hopefully.

I don't know about that. I've had more crashes with Chrome than any other browser, possibly barring IE. So far I haven't seen any advantage to compartmentalizing tabs.

 

[pcslookout]

I don't know about that. I've had more crashes with Chrome than any other browser, possibly barring IE. So far I haven't seen any advantage to compartmentalizing tabs.

Yeah it all depends. I guess we will see if it helps much at all when Firefox 4.0 is released! Can't wait!

 

[Saga]

Firefox because unlike all the people who claim it's "faster", the .001 millisecond difference on my machine is hardly worth making a post about. Chrome was uninstalled promptly after recognizing this. Not to mention Firefox NEVER crashes for me and hasn't in the many years I've used it, but Chrome was a constant crash fest on 3 different machines running 3 different OS's.

Most of the people who complain about Firefox speed are also the same morons who run 90+ processes on a fresh boot.

 

[Fox5]

In my experience, firefox's memory leaks are due to flash. I haven't had a problem since I installed flashblock. Firefox is just hit harder by it since it hasn't yet separated plugins into their own processes.

 

[pcslookout]

In my experience, firefox's memory leaks are due to flash. I haven't had a problem since I installed flashblock. Firefox is just hit harder by it since it hasn't yet separated plugins into their own processes.

Thank you finally someone that sees the real picture. At least there is one person. I really have no idea and this is what I thought at first to. It is not the only thin that causes this though unfortunately. Luckily the stuff that causes firefox to have a memory leak are uninstallable.

 

[pcslookout]

Firefox because unlike all the people who claim it's "faster", the .001 millisecond difference on my machine is hardly worth making a post about. Chrome was uninstalled promptly after recognizing this. Not to mention Firefox NEVER crashes for me and hasn't in the many years I've used it, but Chrome was a constant crash fest on 3 different machines running 3 different OS's.

Most of the people who complain about Firefox speed are also the same morons who run 90+ processes on a fresh boot.

I had the same problem with chrome. It crashes a lot. I thought maybe it was just me but it looks like it isn't,

 

[jrjiri]

I use Chrome as my main browser after switching from FF.

I still use FF as a backup when I wonder if cookies are breaking something or if I need to double check a site layout..

Chrome is faster. (Each tab is running on a separate core of my quad core CPU)
I like the plugins in Chrome more than the plugins in FF (likely because they are all new/working?)
Chrome just works better (more screen space/tabs are way smarter)
Chrome doesn't crash (Tabs will crash but the browser never dies)
Flash works so much better in Chrome, I saw a friend trying to play the same flash video game as me in FF and he had delays of up to 5 seconds for things that were instant for me in Chrome.
Chrome is smarter about it's files/locations with modern OSes
Chrome comes in MANY self-contained versions. I can load GMail in Chromium Iron and then login to a company google account in Chrome without any confusion.
FF doesn't have an entire OS project based around it (Chrome OS is pretty slick!)

FF reminds me of nutscrape agrivator, which I refused to support just because it was the best alternative to IE. I use the best browser, I don't care who made it, but it does suck when I'm reminded of kludge when I am using FF.

Opera is handy because it has the turbo mode which is great for stealthing and slow connections. I also like the spiffy new extended preview tabs, that looks "keen", but don't know I'd "need" it and may not even "want" it after the novelty wears off.

IE is essential to have some experience with, if you have to help someone else out and don't know what browser they have you can always get a website loaded quickly with WinKey+R "iexplore" [ENTER] on any windows PC.

Safari? Gesh, I used it on a mac a couple times. Seemed slow and cluttered. Looked like something Mozilla based, which I don't like.

 

[pcslookout]

I use Chrome as my main browser after switching from FF.

I still use FF as a backup when I wonder if cookies are breaking something or if I need to double check a site layout..

Chrome is faster. (Each tab is running on a separate core of my quad core CPU)
I like the plugins in Chrome more than the plugins in FF (likely because they are all new/working?)
Chrome just works better (more screen space/tabs are way smarter)
Chrome doesn't crash (Tabs will crash but the browser never dies)
Flash works so much better in Chrome, I saw a friend trying to play the same flash video game as me in FF and he had delays of up to 5 seconds for things that were instant for me in Chrome.
Chrome is smarter about it's files/locations with modern OSes
Chrome comes in MANY self-contained versions. I can load GMail in Chromium Iron and then login to a company google account in Chrome without any confusion.
FF doesn't have an entire OS project based around it (Chrome OS is pretty slick!)

FF reminds me of nutscrape agrivator, which I refused to support just because it was the best alternative to IE. I use the best browser, I don't care who made it, but it does suck when I'm reminded of kludge when I am using FF.

Opera is handy because it has the turbo mode which is great for stealthing and slow connections. I also like the spiffy new extended preview tabs, that looks "keen", but don't know I'd "need" it and may not even "want" it after the novelty wears off.

IE is essential to have some experience with, if you have to help someone else out and don't know what browser they have you can always get a website loaded quickly with WinKey+R "iexplore" [ENTER] on any windows PC.

Safari? Gesh, I used it on a mac a couple times. Seemed slow and cluttered. Looked like something Mozilla based, which I don't like.

I had the whole chrome browser crash on me before. There is no ad blocking add on that works like firefox's ad block either. I know why flash works better on chrome it is a separate process. Firefox 3.6 will soon have this feature too. Firefox 4.0 will run all tabs in separate cores as you call it as well. Internet Explorer is the same way with flash I think and has been for a while. Not sure why it took Firefox so long but thankfully it is happening! You can download the beta version of Firefox 3.6 with this already if you want to test it out. Works well.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

I have found some pages in chrome do cause it to 'run away' with my ram. Last night I had chrome lock up to find out it was using about 300 megs of ram with only 1 tab open. But for the most part I have no issues.

Unless you can post an example I'm calling shens.

 

[sourceninja]

Unless you can post an example I'm calling shens.

Call it whatever you want. I use chrome everyday. It's my favorite browser. But it seems to choke now and then on pages. Especially if you use DOMNode events in JavaScript.

 

[0roo0roo]

Yep I seen the exact same thing with chrome. The advantage you can close as that one process that is running away with ram to get it back quickly without restarting your browser. Firefox will soon have where each tab has its own process too. Will be a much needed feature. The only other browser that doesn't have this yet is Opera. Shouldn't be to long until firefox gets the feature hopefully.

I can easily get chrome to use 400 to 600 MB + of ram in just a few minutes as well.

cept chrome seems to page out or whatever to save ram..but it makes it slow if you get back to it after a while with a load of tabs. so i stopped using it for anything more than a secondary browser with minimal tabs. chrome is faster in theory..with a few tabs open. firefox is faster over all when you really start using it heavily.

 

[pcslookout]

cept chrome seems to page out or whatever to save ram..but it makes it slow if you get back to it after a while with a load of tabs. so i stopped using it for anything more than a secondary browser with minimal tabs. chrome is faster in theory..with a few tabs open. firefox is faster over all when you really start using it heavily.

Yep I found the exact same thing. Glad I am not the only one that notice this.

 

[EarthwormJim]

Except the fact that everyone (but you, apparently) knows that these days more and more of OSX users have converted to Chrome (and Firefox before that) because they perform better than Safari. Everyone knows that everyone (but you) knows this.

Except that what the theflyingpig actually writes is the complete opposite of what he means. Everyone knows this.


I used Chrome when it first came out, but I couldn't live without a real version of adblock. Now that there's extensions in Chrome, I'm trying it out on my netbook first. So far it seems faster than Firefox.

 

[ShawnD1]

I used Chrome when it first came out, but I couldn't live without a real version of adblock. Now that there's extensions in Chrome, I'm trying it out on my netbook first. So far it seems faster than Firefox.

Chrome seems a lot more aggressive when it comes to caching things. I just installed it yesterday after a clean format of this drive and my cache folder is already 329mb. Firefox appears to make an effort to reduce cache as often as possible even though I set the max to 2000mb.

 

[Locut0s]

Chrome seems a lot more aggressive when it comes to caching things. I just installed it yesterday after a clean format of this drive and my cache folder is already 329mb. Firefox appears to make an effort to reduce cache as often as possible even though I set the max to 2000mb.

I like FF but that's actually probably a good thing. With todays HDD sizes space isn't at a premium for the most part.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Chrome is bloody, bloody fast. Everything happens pretty much instantly, whereas Firefox still has a perceptible delay, small as it may be. Firefox has addons. Except Chrome does too. But Firefox's ones are generally more mature. Though Firefox seems to like to break compatibility with them every time you update to a new version. Firefox has a lot more tools; you can install different toolbars, etc, and you generally get a lot more choice over how it looks. But Chrome is really, really simple, and that means lots of screen space too. Firefox works better with forums. Chrome works much better with fewer tabs open; everything starts slowing down after about the 10th tab. Whereas Firefox is a lot slower overall, but its speed doesn't degrade as much when you open lots of tabs. Chrome is practically multithreaded - even though each thread can only run on one core as far as I can tell, Chrome creates one for every single tab. On the other hand, this also means that if you have lots of tabs open when you call up the Task Manager you can't see anything useful because the whole processes pane is taken up with lots of Chrome.exe's.

tl;dr: It depends on what you like. Use both of them.