The question of which browser loads the system the least should be considered from the point of view of multimedia content or development tools provided by the browsers themselves.
If we talk about multimedia, it’s immediately worth considering that the processing tools provided by default browsers in the main versions of programs are often supplemented by a fairly large number of special plugins. Take, for example, the same Adobe Flash Player, which is responsible for high-quality reproduction of animation, graphics and sound.
Thus, the relevant question will be not so much about which browser consumes the least resources, but about how resource-intensive the additional plugin is, because the browser itself in its pure form may not work with some elements of web pages.
Basic performance parameters
If we consider the main characteristics of the most famous and most commonly used means of surfing the Internet, the first place for any user or expert tester is the speed of launching the program itself from an executable file and the speed of opening pages.
Unfortunately, many users who are trying to figure out which browser uses less CPU or RAM, often ignore the application startup options. So to speak, in their pure form after installation, they all start quite quickly. This is only due to the fact that they do not have plugins connected, the cache is not full, there is no browsing history, etc.
Over time, any, even the most sophisticated browser with a bunch of bells and whistles turns into a clumsy hulk. The saddest thing is that even clearing the cache or deleting temporary files does not help. And if you also take into account the initialization of plug-ins at program startup, in general, it’s worth thinking about the advisability of installing them.
Some applications have their own set that cannot be deleted, but can be disabled. For example, Chrome comes with built-in components like Adobe Flash Player or AdBlock. If everything is clear with the first plugin, the second sometimes causes legitimate complaints. It is responsible for blocking ads, pop-ups and banners, and can also prevent some auto-executing scripts and applets embedded in web pages from working. And all this takes a lot of time.
Opening pages with preliminary content analysis directly depends on the content. Any modern browser takes a fraction of a second to do this. Again, it all depends on the plugins - the more there are, the slower the program runs. And incorrectly installed or incompatible add-ons slow down the system even more.
Which browsers use less memory?
But let’s start checking the means of Internet access themselves. Here you should take into account the consumption of RAM, virtual and physical memory. If you understand the question of which browser loads the system the least, you should pay attention to the basic default settings and the size of the allocated cache.
Cached data, although it allows you to increase the speed of opening the most frequently visited pages by saving some elements on the hard drive, is nevertheless capable of clogging up the system too much and causing programs to freeze. This is due to the constant analysis of loaded structural elements of pages. If there is a sufficiently large number of them, more time is required for analysis and loading.
In this regard, the best performance, judging by user and expert reviews, is shown by Internet Explorer 11, Edge from Windows 10, Mozilla and Google Chrome. Opera, although a very popular means of accessing the Internet, is much slower. In addition, today you can find so many versions of the program in unofficial sources that you don’t always know whether a given product is safe.
The best browsers: ratings and reviews
If we consider modern browsers, we can compile a list in which, as one would expect, there are only programs from the most famous developers:
- Internet Explorer;
- Edge;
- Opera;
- Chrome.
It would be possible to add here some programs like Amigo, Yandex Browser, 360 Safety Browser or something else. But they are specifically not included in the list, since they are built on the basis of Chrome and are not of interest as truncated or expanded derivatives of the main product. Often, due to unfinished technologies and algorithms, many more problems arise in them than in the parent product. This is evidenced by clearly unflattering statements from users.
Now let’s look at the question of which browser loads the system the least in a little more detail.
Internet Explorer
Users have an extremely negative attitude towards IE, which is part of any Windows operating system, since the early versions of the program were so unfinished that it was not even possible to talk about any ease of working on the Internet.
Over time, Microsoft developers revised the basic concept of the browser, resulting in the 11th version of the application. No matter what anyone says, Internet Explorer 11 in all respects surpasses Mozilla, Chrome, and even more so Opera. The load is minimal, startup is much faster than similar applications, clearing the cache and temporary files does not require user intervention, as it was before (you had to clean the Temporary Files folders manually).
Edge
The same Internet Explorer became the progenitor of a new generation browser called Edge, which appeared only in Windows 10 (a version is not provided for systems of a lower rank).
This application rightfully occupies the top positions in all ratings. Most of the background processes when starting the program are automated, the start takes place within a couple of seconds, opening pages even without installing the accompanying plugins is very fast. By the way, you don’t need to install add-ons - everything comes included here.
Another thing is that this browser is somewhat inconvenient to configure, especially in terms of disabling extensions. And the default start page (news, weather, advertising, etc.) is a little annoying. But all this can be disabled if you set the dummy at startup, similar to how it is done in IE.
Opera
The notorious "Opera", although revered by many, has recently lost ground. Despite the convenient and fairly simple interface, performance leaves much to be desired.
Even at startup, you may notice that it takes too long to access the hard drive, as well as when completely clearing the cache and deleting temporary files. True, one of the advantages is the ability to quickly configure, disable or remove extensions. But this in no way can affect the overall rating.
Mozilla Firefox
The search for an answer to the question of which browser loads the system the least cannot do without this browser.
Light and fast - that's what you can say about it. However, not all users appreciate it fully. The fact is that “Fire Fox” cannot be considered as the most primitive means of accessing the Internet. This browser is more suitable for web developers and can be used as a complete platform for creating web applications. The tools here are much wider than what other favorites on the list offer.
Chrome and browsers based on it
Chrome is considered the fastest of all existing browsers. Developments based on it are fast only after the first installation, but over time they begin to slow down incredibly.
The speed of launch, the speed of opening pages, and the ease of setup or management are excellent. Plus - the largest number of developed plugins and extensions. The question is different. Is it worth installing them? This is something everyone decides for themselves. Nevertheless, this browser is not inferior to Edge in all the main indicators in the popularity lists.
What to choose?
So, choose the lightest browser. Of course, preference (based on user reviews) could be given to Microsoft products, however, it is believed that the best option would be to install Chrome.
And here the choice is supported not only by technical characteristics or performance parameters with minimal load on the system. If you look more broadly, you will notice that the latest version of the application supports RDP (remote desktop) technologies and can be used as the main client for connecting to computers and laptops, even from mobile devices.
Thus, the balance in the question of which browser loads the system the least, is the easiest to manage and configure, clearly tips in favor of Chrome, although this assessment is based solely on ratings, nothing more.
A huge number of different web browsers poses questions to the user: how to choose not only a functional, but also a lightweight browser that will not “eat up” a large amount of RAM? This instruction will try to answer the question of which browser is the least resource-consuming.
Any program running on a computer consumes a certain amount of resources necessary for its full operation. In the case of a browser, the amount of RAM consumed depends on several factors:
Browser optimizations. A browser that is not optimized by developers will consume a large amount of RAM, which is especially critical if the user’s computer (laptop) is equipped with only 2-4 GB;
Open tabs. Each site opened in the browser is allocated additional RAM. The more of them are open in the browser, the more voracious the web browser becomes;
Viruses. Virus activity affects the operation of the operating system and programs, in particular browsers, disrupting their correct operation.
If we take into account all the above factors, then it is rational to consider browsers that are completely empty, that is, without add-ons and with the same number of tabs. Only in this way can we more accurately determine which of them consumes less resources.
Comparison of RAM consumption in different browsers
Below we will provide a comparison of RAM consumption for such popular browsers as Google Chrome, Yandex Browser, Opera and Mozilla Firefox.
When opening one tab
Below in the graph you can see the amount of RAM consumed by browsers when the Freeprograms.me website is open. From the graph it becomes clear that the most consumed browser is Mozilla Firefox, and the lightest is Opera.
When opening three tabs
Let's change the situation by opening three identical tabs in each browser. And this time the results remained the same. It is only worth noting that Chrome has become a little more power-hungry, almost catching up with Firefox.
When you open ten tabs
Many users can't cope with working with two or three tabs, so it's rational to see how browsers will behave with ten open tabs. Here, Opera still remains the least RAM-consuming browser, which cannot be said about other web browsers: Yandex Browser and Google Chrome have moved up significantly, eating up quite a lot of RAM, while Mozilla Firefox has come very close to Opera in terms of results .
After unloading nine tabs
Immediately after this, we closed 9 tabs in each browser and checked for changes in RAM consumption. Actually, everything is back to normal - Opera is in first place in terms of efficiency, and Firefox is again in last place.
Let's sum it up
From our research, it becomes clear that the most effective browser at all stages of testing was the Opera browser. At the same time, it is worth noting that Mozilla Firefox behaves well with a large number of open tabs, which cannot be said about Google Chrome and Yandex Browser, which greatly increase the amount of RAM consumed with each new tab.
At the same time, I would like to note that each of the presented candidates is a powerful and functional web browser that behaves well with a large number of open tabs.
What browser do you use?
Hi all. You know that there is a browser that consumes little RAM and which does not overload the system and does not eat up a lot of RAM.
Yes, there is such a browser, but few people know about it. And this is Pale Moon. I learned about it a long time ago - I liked it because, unlike others, it works under a normal engine - Mozilla, it’s just that everything is very optimized and even some processor instructions seem to be taken into account. That is why I can even say that this is the fastest browser today.
True, I still use Chrome, which is slower. Why Chrome? Yes, there are many reasons - bookmarks, necessary extensions, something else... I don’t remember anymore... that is, I use Chrome only because I’ve been using it for more than one year. And not all the extensions I need are supported in Pale Moon.
Pale Moon is based on the Mozilla engine, but not the latest version. I don’t know how they change it, it seems out of necessity, but all the sites work very well. And there is no Russian language yet - but it can be installed separately without any problems. After installing Pale Moon and loading a website, you will immediately notice the difference.
You can download Pale Moon here (off site):
It is completely free and does not install anything extra during installation. There are both 32-bit and 64-bit versions. Installation is simple and should not cause any difficulties:
I downloaded the browser, installed it, and launched it - this is what it looks like:
Yes, right away, of course, he’s not very good. But if you set the Russian language and play around with the interface, it will become much more convenient. I won’t write about the Russian language - I thought it would be difficult to deliver. But as it turned out, everything is easy, there are instructions on the Internet, everything is simple there, if you want, then install it. The main thing about a browser is its speed.
Regarding the RAM and the load on the computer - yes, it loads little and uses little RAM. But don’t forget that websites are also quite fragile now—it can’t be that a heavy website can fly in a super-fast browser on an old computer. I hope you understand this.
The browser is cool in my opinion. But there are downsides, or only one downside: extensions. There are few of them and they are special for Pale Moon. I don’t remember exactly - from regular Mozilla either all of them don’t work or only some work.
Even now - I installed Pale Moon, searched for YouTube - it opened incredibly quickly. Another site is also unrealistic. Well, simple websites can be opened in just one second.
Pale Moon main menu:
I opened a couple of sites. Now I have closed them. I looked in the manager - the browser (the palemoon.exe process) uses 200 megagrams of RAM, which by today’s standards seems to be not much:
Now I have opened the sites again - Google search engine, Apple site, Pale Moon, RBC, YouTube. Everything is loaded:
In the dispatcher, RAM consumption increased to 300 megs:
But I must admit that when everything was loaded, consumption reached 360, and immediately after it was loaded, it was 300. The entire loading process took a matter of seconds.
300 megs - a lot or a little? It's difficult to answer. I stopped monitoring my RAM consumption a long time ago. But when I was watching, and this was back in the days of Windows XP, then the optimal amount was no more than 250 meg. Overall, I think the browser is good and uses little resources.
I didn't write about CPU usage. It all depends on the site itself; if it’s heavy, it can load it, but I think it won’t last long, and the sites themselves load quickly. That is, all these processes in the browser are optimized.
On the Internet, and maybe on the official website, you can even find a version for Atom processors.
The browser is installed in this folder:
C:\Program Files\Pale Moon
The size of the folder with the browser weighs almost 100 megagrams:
The official website has a portable version (portable) - you can put it on a flash drive and carry it with you.
To remove the browser, press Win + R, then paste the command:
Find Pale Moon in the list, right-click and select Uninstall:
Can be removed without problems.
That's all. I hope the information was useful. Good luck.
19.10.2017Very often there is a desire to use the browser that is least demanding of computer resources, but it is not always possible to test or simply find out which modern browser consumes fewer computer resources; the most consumed resource when surfing the Internet is RAM.
Therefore, this review will test browsers with an emphasis on looking at RAM usage. The browsers tested are Mozilla Firefox 3.6.3, Opera 10.53, Google Chrome 5.0.375.55, Safari 5, Firefox 3.7a6pre, Opera 10.60 Beta, Microsoft Internet Explorer 7, Google Chrome 6.0.432, Microsoft Internet Explorer 8, Opera 10.60, K- Meleon 1.5.4, SeaMonkey 2.0.5, Mozilla Firefox 3.6.6, TheWorld Browser 2.4.1.5, ChromePlus 1.4.1, Firefox 4.0 beta 4, SRWare Iron 5.0.382, Google Chrome 6.0.472.55, Firefox 3.6.9, Opera 10.62, Opera 9.01. It should be noted that these are not all browsers presented in the world, but many of those presented are the most used.
Table 1 presents the data obtained based on the testing performed. The testing itself consists of 2 stages.
Preparation.
The following pages were used for testing:
At the first stage The browser was initially loaded, settings were made: the initial page was changed to empty (if possible). Then the browser was closed, a minute later it was opened again, measurements of the memory used were taken after the browser started. After that, 9 html pages without graphics and JavaScript were loaded into it, the pages were expected to fully load, if there were errors with the encoding, then the encoding was first changed to the correct one manually (through the available menu in browsers), and only then the used RAM was measured, as well as peak RAM usage. After the measurements, the browser closed. Next, the steps were repeated for each browser.
At the second stage The browser loaded again, 9 html pages from the "html_js_pic" folder were loaded into it, graphics and javascripts were loaded. It then waited for it to fully load, and once it was fully loaded, each page was scrolled from top to bottom and then from bottom to top to check that it was displaying correctly. The next step was to measure RAM consumption and peak RAM usage.
Definitions:
Start- data about the RAM used by the browser after startup
9 html- data on RAM used when 9 “naked” html pages are loaded
9 html+pic+js- data on RAM used when 9 html pages with graphics and javascripts are loaded
Max. 9 html- data on peak RAM used when 9 “naked” html pages are loaded
Max. 9 html+pic+js- data on the peak used RAM when 9 html pages with graphics and javascripts are loaded
Table 1 - RAM usage by browsers
| Browser | RAM usage, KiB (1 KiB = 1024 bytes) | ||||
| Start | 9 html | 9 html+pic+js | Max. 9 html | Max. 9 html+pic+js | |
| Mozilla Firefox 3.6.3 | 38 696 | 60 320 | 79 520 | 60 664 | 92 560 |
| Opera 10.53 | 42 344 | 63 724 | 120 552 | 63 836 | 120 656 |
| Google Chrome 5.0.375.55 | 37 300 | 201 156 | 252 344 | 250 072 | 310 456 |
| Safari 5.0 | 41 656 | 72 156 | 119 676 | 96 492 | 126 532 |
| Firefox 3.7a6pre | 42 904 | 63 968 | 91 220 | 71 284 | 98 163 |
| Opera 10.60 Beta | 49 640 | 70 724 | 122 484 | 70 840 | 122 600 |
| Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 | 22 004 | 40 372 | 62 900 | 41 668 | 64 152 |
| Google Chrome 6.0.432 | 38 684 | 211 220 | 258 616 | 288 424 | 317 528 |
| Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 | 39 152 | 137 076 | 157 924 | 137 596 | 158 696 |
| Opera 10.60 | 44 680 | 66 788 | 117 716 | 67 292 | 117 816 |
| K-Meleon 1.5.4 | 18 084 | 35 044 | 64 156 | 38 352 | 72 024 |
| SeaMonkey 2.0.5 | 35 732 | 57 652 | 80 732 | 59 068 | 90 748 |
| Mozilla Firefox 3.6.6 | 38 992 | 56 144 | 65 088 | 56 612 | 75 488 |
| TheWorld Browser 2.4.1.5 | 23 800 | 51 624 | 112 252 | 52 052 | 113 788 |
| ChromePlus 1.4.1 | 31 168 | 83 404 | 132 060 | 99 260 | 161 516 |
| Firefox 4.0 beta 4 | 40 668 | 86 344 | 128 768 | 92 072 | 135 356 |
| SRWare Iron 5.0.382 | 37 964 | 89 288 | 129 836 | 106 932 | 149 396 |
| Google Chrome 6.0.472.55 | 35 108 | 82 390 | 123 196 | 97 908 | 145 604 |
| Firefox 3.6.9 | 40 960 | 64 288 | 82 752 | 65 720 | 94 212 |
| Opera 10.62 | 38 988 | 60 704 | 108 524 | 60 708 | 108 892 |
| Opera 9.01 | 57 684 | 64 156 | |||
The RAM consumption of the Opera browser can be significantly reduced by changing the standard settings: General settings... (Crtl+F12), Advanced tab -> History - Uncheck "Remember the contents of visited pages", Memory cache: 4 MB, Disk cache - Disabled , after these actions, the result in the "9 html+pic+js" test changed: 89132 KiB, peak usage: 95756 KiB.
Notes:
- Mozilla Firefox 3.6.3: In test 9, html did not recognize the encoding; I had to manually change the encoding in 4 pages. In test 9 html+pic+js 2 pages were recognized in the wrong encoding; the encoding was changed manually.
- Opera 10.53: In test 9, html froze while trying to load missing images and javascripts. In this mode, there is a long wait for a full download when using proxy servers.
- Google Chrome 5.0.375.55: At start, 2 processes were used. In html mode 9, 4 pages were displayed in the wrong encoding. Encoding changes were made manually. 11 processes are running, 10 of them are children. Google Chrome has a built-in Task Manager that allows you to see the consumption of both RAM and virtual memory; the total RAM usage indicators in Google Chrome do not match the Task Manager of the Windows operating system. Google Chrome shows the browser's use of RAM - 101121 KiB, at the same time it also shows processes and the total consumption of RAM by processes, where the data converges with the Windows OS Task Manager - 215180 KiB, including the About Memory tab. In test 9 html+pic+js the encoding was incorrectly recognized on one page - yandex.ru. Google Chrome readings in test 9 html+pic+js - the total RAM consumed by the browser is 142982 KiB, the total RAM consumed by browser processes is 265704 KiB.
- Safari 5.33: When loading in the 9 html test, Safari consumed the entire processor power of the computer. When displayed, the incorrect encoding was displayed on 4 pages; the encoding was changed manually. Long attempt to load missing images and scripts when using a proxy server. In test 9 html+pic+js, a page in the wrong encoding was recognized, the correct encoding was set manually.
- Firefox 3.7a6pre: As in the situation with Firefox 3.6.3, not all pages in the 9 html test were displayed in the correct encoding, the encoding was changed manually in 3 pages. In test 9 html+pic+js the browser selected the wrong encoding on page 1. The correct encoding was manually set.
- Opera 10.60 Beta: When loading in the 9 html test, Opera 10.60 Beta behaved the same as Opera 10.53, sometimes freezing when loading pages.
- Microsoft Internet Explorer 7: In test 9, html could not display the correct encoding everywhere; the correct encoding was manually set in 3 pages. Freezes occurred while pages were loading. In test 9 html+pic+js the encoding was not selected correctly on 2 pages. The encoding was changed to the correct one in manual mode. Also, not all pages were displayed correctly.
- Google Chrome 6.0.432: The situation is similar to the Google Chrome 5.0.375.55 browser, 2 processes are running at the start. In the 9 html test, the number of pages with incorrect encoding is 4. The encodings were replaced with correct ones manually. The Google Chrome task manager showed the total use of RAM by the browser - 103856 KiB, the total use of RAM by Google Chrome processes - 225924 KiB. In mode 9 html+pic+js the browser selected the wrong encoding on one page, the encoding was changed to the correct one manually. The Google Chrome task manager showed the total RAM usage by the browser as 148669 KiB, and the total RAM usage by browser processes as 273632 KiB.
- Microsoft Internet Explorer 8: At start, 2 processes were used. In mode 9, html could not display the correct encoding on 3 pages; the correct encoding was set manually. Freezes occurred while pages were loading. In mode 9 html+pic+js the encoding is not recognized correctly on 2 pages. The encoding has been changed to the correct one in manual mode. Also, not all pages were displayed correctly. The browser created 4 child processes. There were a total of 5 Microsoft Internet Explorer processes in the task manager.
- Opera 10.60: In test 9, html froze while trying to load missing images and javascripts.
- K-Meleon1.5.4: In the 9 html test, 4 pages were displayed with incorrect encoding, the encoding was changed manually. In test 9 html+pic+js the browser encoding was incorrectly selected in 2 pages. The encoding was changed to the correct one manually. One page displaying incorrectly - Apple Safari
- SeaMonkey 2.0.5: In test 9 html 4 pages were displayed in the wrong encoding; the encodings were changed to the correct ones manually. In test 9, html+pic+js displayed 2 pages in the wrong encoding; changes to the correct encodings were made manually.
- Mozilla Firefox 3.6.6: In the 9 html test, the encoding of 4 pages was displayed incorrectly; I had to change the encodings manually. In test 9 html+pic+js 2 pages were recognized in the wrong encoding; the encoding was changed manually. The Mozilla Firefox browser page was not displayed correctly.
- TheWorld Browser 2.4.1.5: In test 9 html the encoding was set incorrectly in 3 pages. Encoding changes were made manually. In test 9, html+pic+js displayed 2 pages in the wrong encoding. Encodings have been changed to the correct ones in manual mode. Incorrect display of some sites.
- ChromePlus 1.4.1: In the "9 html" test, 4 pages are displayed with incorrect encoding, changes to the correct encodings were made manually. In the "9 html+pic+js" test, the Yandex page was displayed in the wrong encoding, the encoding was changed to the correct one manually, also in this test, sometimes the browser opened the same page in two tabs, extra tabs were closed manually.
- Firefox 4.0 beta 4: In the "9 html" test, 4 pages were displayed with incorrect encoding, changes to the correct encoding were made manually. In the "9 html+pic+js" test, the Yandex page was displayed in the wrong encoding; the encoding was changed to the correct one manually.
- SRWare Iron 5.0.382: In the "9 html" test, 3 pages were displayed with incorrect encoding, changes to the correct encoding were made manually, 4 pages were not displayed by the browser at all. In the "9 html+pic+js" test, 3 pages were not displayed.
- Google Chrome 6.0.472.55: In the "9 html" test there are 4 pages with incorrect encoding, changes to the correct encodings were made manually. In the "9 html+pic+js" test, the Yandex page is in the wrong encoding; the encoding was changed manually.
- Firefox 3.6.9: In the "9 html" test there are 4 pages with incorrect encoding, changes to the correct encodings were made manually. In the test "9 html+pic+js" there are 2 pages in the wrong encoding, the encoding was manually changed to the correct one.
The Opera 9.01 browser was used as an example, it is already very old, but it consumes very little RAM, there are no comments regarding performance, the data on the used RAM, discussed in Table 1, indicates the least use of RAM.
An interesting fact is that wherever there was an encoding discrepancy, the main page of Yandex.ru was in all cases.
For those who want a more modern browser and use less computer resources, it’s worth taking a closer look at Mozilla Firefox 3.6.6 (if you don’t already use it), it showed almost the best result in terms of RAM usage both in “bare” html pages and and loaded with graphics and JavaScript, it should be noted that the memory consumption of the browser will change dramatically when using plugins; the test used the Mozilla Firefox browser with a standard installation.
For those who appreciate fast loading and response to actions and have a sufficient amount of RAM in the computer, you should take a closer look at the Opera and Google Chrome browsers, the Opera browser has a fast response and high quality animation and smoothness for any actions in the browser, Google Chrome also provides a fast response on actions in the browser, but scrolling pages and other actions use a minimum of animation, which ultimately increases the performance of the browser.
Microsoft Internet Explorer should only be used as a last resort, one reason can be found in the Notes.
This test presents the results only for testing consumed RAM.
Testing browsers Opera, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Microsoft Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, K-Meleon, SeaMonkey, TheWorld Browser
A modern browser, for most users, is the main universal tool for obtaining information from the Internet, and ensures the user's interactive presence in the virtual world. The computer can be used to solve any computing or design problems, but the browser is always open in the background or in active mode.
Therefore, the question of which browser “eats” less RAM, how many machine resources it takes for its work, is important, especially for computers with a small amount of RAM.
Who and how we test
To evaluate, compare “heaviness” and search for the browser that loads the system the least, several popular ones and several exotic experimental ones were selected.
- Internet Explorer v. 11.345.17134.0
- Opera v. 56.0.3051.99
- Mozilla Firefox v. 63.0.1 (64-bit)
- Google Chrome 70.0.3538.77 (Official build), (64 bit)
- Flash Peak Slimjet v. 20.0.4.0 (based on Chromium 68.0.3440.75 32-bit)
- Sea Monkey v. 2.49.3 (based on Mozilla)
- Edge v. 42.17134.1.0 (built into Windows 10 from Microsoft)
During the experiment, only the “gluttony” in relation to RAM was taken into account, and the parameters of processor load, speed and traffic from the Internet were ignored, although they are important and should also be taken into account when choosing a browser. All browsers were launched sequentially, one after another, under the same conditions. In addition to the browser, there was a Word editor and an Excel table. The parameters were recorded by the Task Manager. A total of four measurements were made for each browser:
- One tab is loading, Yandex main page
- One tab open, Yandex main page
- Five tabs are open:
- Yandex main,
- Google news,
- mail,
- news aggregator "It's a Small World"
- YouTube, while the YouTube tab is active and the video is in playback mode.
- Fifteen tabs are open, the active tab is the last one, with the document:
- Yandex (home, mail and feed);
- Google (news and mail);
- Rambler main;
- news aggregator "It's a Small World";
- YouTube with videos in pause mode (three tabs);
- Forum (two tabs);
- Livejournal;
- Bright Side;
- viewing a document of type .pdf in a browser
Processes and results
The obtained data are summarized in diagrams.
Diagram 1. Browsers hogging memory when one tab is open.
The blue bar is the tab in the process of reloading, the red bar is after the page is fully loaded and rendered. The leaders in the economical use of RAM during low activity are: I.E. And Flash Peak Slimjet, and the most wasteful Mozilla and her clone Sea Monkey.
Diagram 2. Five tabs are open and a video is playing in the active tab.
And again the leader in efficiency Flash Peak Slimjet, and the most wasteful browser is Mozilla
Diagram 3. Fifteen tabs are open.
The picture of RAM resource consumption has changed dramatically. Flash Peak Slimjet and in this mode shows the minimum amount of memory required, and the worst result for Microsoft products is the browser built into Windows 10 Edge, requires an indecent amount of RAM for its operation.
Diagram 4. All tested browsers are displayed in one field.
| Browser | One tab | 5 tabs | 15 tabs | |
| Internet Explorer | 94 | 80 | 607 | 1640 |
| Opera | 267 | 247 | 680 | 1347 |
| Mozilla Firefox | 330 | 293 | 750 | 890 |
| Google Chrome | 205 | 190 | 530 | 680 |
| Flash Peak Slimjet | 120 | 67 | 472 | 387 |
| Sea Monkey | 420 | 377 | 530 | 1005 |
| Edge | 180 | 155 | 650 | 2520 |
Blue and red - one open tab, green - five tabs, purple - fifteen tabs.
Browser Flash Peak Slimjet demonstrates the most modest requirements for memory resources in all boot modes.
In the mode of five open tabs, other browsers show approximately similar memory access values.
Under heavy load Mozilla And Chrome increase the RAM request slightly, Sea Monkey And Opera require a doubling of memory for their tasks, and Microsoft products Internet Explorer And Edge request three to four times more memory than a small load.
Conclusion
For a computer with limited RAM, we recommend Flash Peak Slimjet. The efficiency of the browser is explained by the fact that it stores only one tab in RAM at any given time - the active one. The remaining tabs are stored on the hard drive and are loaded when accessed, while the formerly active one is stored on the disk. This method saves memory, but noticeably slows down work.
IE and Edge browsers are recommended only for computers with at least 8GB of RAM, as they store all open tabs in RAM. If there is insufficient memory, they try to save some of the tabs to disk, but the developers poorly designed this feature, and the browsers freeze, stopping responding, after about the tenth open tab. A positive quality is the high speed of switching between tabs.
Browsers Mozilla, Opera, Chrome, Sea Monkey occupy an intermediate position in terms of required RAM and stability. The choice of any of them is dictated by the user’s habit and personal taste.
