Resource Usage in Browsers: IE 11 vs. Firefox 25.0.1 vs. Chrome 31

octoberasian

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
4,082
Ok, this is more of an observational post than asking for help since my friend, on OSX and using Chrome, was curious how much better is IE 11 lately.

I showed him this for Internet Explorer 11 (Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit):

2013-12-02_17-00-19.png


That's 5 tabs opened only:

  • [H]ardForum
  • 3 Minecraft wiki pages
  • Dropbox account page
So, 5 tabs opened and it's already using 12.8% CPU and 1.1GB of RAM. This is also with all add-ons DISABLED and GPU rendering enabled.

Then, we get to Chrome 31:

2013-12-02_17-17-57.png


This is with 100 tabs opened and 24 extensions enabled, along with hardware rendering. That's 1.143GB RAM and between 3% to 12% CPU usage.

And then, we get to Firefox 25.0.1:

2013-12-02_17-51-11.png


This is with 463 tabs opened and 27 extensions enabled. But, Firefox was the biggest culprit when it came to CPU usage. Opening a blank new tab, reloading an existing tab, or opening a new website in a new tab caused the CPU to spike to 27% before dropping back down to as low as 3%. It usually hovered between 3% to 8% CPU usage normally.

RAM steadily rose and peaked at 1.3GB of RAM, going no higher.

(And, yes, 463 tabs.)

However, this was the least stable browser out of the three that I've used so far. If Firefox went above 2GB of RAM or peaked to 3GB, it'll crash immediately.

What I'm curious though: Why is only 5 tabs opened in IE 11 (desktop, non-Metro) causing 12% average CPU usage and 1GB of RAM already?

It's the weirdest thing I've ever seen in a web browser. Even my friend was surprised that IE 11 was doing this when Chrome with 20 times the opened tabs and extensions enabled was using just as much RAM.

Has anyone noticed similar resource usage allotments with these browsers?
 
I think you need to put a little more scientific method into your testing methodology.

I opened IE11 on Win7x64 and several tabs with more intensive pages than you with addons like flash and got nothing like that.

Took about 5 seconds to invalidate these results in my mind.
 
Your data shows an interesting comparison of how each browser handles the same data.

Otherwise, I have a ton of memory that does nothing. I have no problem with Firefox gobbling it up because at least it's being used. What's the point of buying all this hardware if it does nothing.
 
To bad IE 11 Breaks everything. Including Microsofts Own Products like exchange and RDWEB.
 
If you want to get meaningful results out of something like this, you have to be a lot more scientific.
 
Memory constraint is a non-issue these days. I'd rather focus on stability, security, usability and performance. Having cycling through all three I still return to Chrome.
 
Google chrome is such shit such a boring interface all of the settings are hidden with a wrench the enlargement scaling is messed up for webpages. IE is the only good option because it's 64 bit and it scales everything nice. I used to like Opera a lot I used it for years on end but it's not 64 bit and I had trouble with the zoom feature.

I'm trying to ween my parents to use IE now since Chrome is all wacked out on drugs.
 
I have tried Opera 12, Chrome 28(?), firefox 25, and internet Explorer 10 on a computer which I have built in 2001. I feel that Opera is fastest.

It has

CPU athlon 1200
Ram 1 GB
ATI 9200.

Chrome and Firefox are very slow.

Internet Explorer can't even load.
 
Your IE11 results are odd. With 9 of my typical pages open (tech sites like [H], neowin, Slashdot, etc), I get 340MBs of RAM used in IE11. While RAM conservation has it's benefits, using available RAM can speed up the system. I've messed around with FireFox (and variants like Palemoon and WaterFox) and chrome, and I always come back to IE. IE has some benefits, to name a few, 64-bit is a checkbox, no extra download and/or unsupported code, 32-bit plug-ins load in 64-bit IE with a fallback mode that loads only that particular tab in 32-bit mode. Benefits of 64-bit are more memory of course, which is not too relevant to most internet browsing, but more importantly higher amounts of security since the security feature ASLR, which randomizes code to make it harder for malware to exploit the browser and infect the system, is greatly strengthened by going from 32-bit to 64-bit virtual address space. IE11 can also, with a checkbox, use the Metro App sandbox for desktop IE, which is by accounts I have seen, the strongest sandbox out of the browser sandboxes. Chrome also has a decent sandbox, but lacks 64-bit, and Firefox is not sandboxed at all but 64-bit is somewhat available. Then, chrome and firefox have plug-ins/add-ons that users enjoy, this seems mostly to be ad related stuff, which you can get 99% of the benefit of those with IE's tracker protection lists. Also, on my system anyway, IE is faster for common actions like opening a blank tab, or closing a tab, loading the kind of pages I visit is about the same speed on all of them though.

I see people complain that IE doesn't work with this or that, but for me any how, it works with everything I do, and I've used it every day for years. And remember all browsers have their issues, so a browser that works for one user may not work for another. You have to find what works for you though, so just wanted to list some of the under the hood benefits IE has that most people will never know about because you can not click on them or see them or whatever, they are just there working to protect the user and stay hidden.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top