Recommended Posts

Sorry that you're still living in 2007.

Chrome uses around 1.5GB on my computer.

Firefox uses 300MB.

And yes, Firefox loads pages faster for me.

 

 

 

For Firefox HTML5 YouTube videos, I would recommend this addon: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-all-html5/

I used that just to experiment and it did not do anything differently.  But Thanks

One thing I have noticed, when everything is working correctly, many videos on youtube would show "an error occurred" for a split second then the video started - its gone before I could click on the "find out more"

Firefox is better at standards.

Chrome is... just a tool for Google to be evil.

Also Firefox is massively slower than IE/Chrome. It crawls on a quad core Xeon with only Ablock Edge and Firebug.

What does everyone mean by one browser is slower than the other ?

When someone says one browser "crawls" - what specifically are you referring to ?

My first question would be if you're referring to pages coming up - what is your connxn speed and what are you using as a DNS server ?

I cant say that any browser is faster or slower - I have 80/80 connection - everything is instant

Also Firefox is massively slower than IE/Chrome. It crawls on a quad core Xeon with only Ablock Edge and Firebug.

Error: you are using Adblock Edge. It is a resource hog. Try using uBlock (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock).

I used that just to experiment and it did not do anything differently.  But Thanks

One thing I have noticed, when everything is working correctly, many videos on youtube would show "an error occurred" for a split second then the video started - its gone before I could click on the "find out more"

What version of firefox are you using? I believe the developer version has support for more media types than the current one.

What does everyone mean by one browser is slower than the other ?

For me it's rendering speed in general, but mostly sites that are script heavy will really show off just how fast your browser isn't. Firefox used to be pretty bad with that a year+ ago but it's near Chrome's speed now, and with the stuff Mozilla has in development it's just going to get even faster still.  Using beta 37 now with a fairly large number of addons (even something bloated like ABP), and most sites are more or less instant to load now.  Massively slower was true a few years ago.. now that's nonsense.

For me it's rendering speed in general, but mostly sites that are script heavy will really show off just how fast your browser isn't. Firefox used to be pretty bad with that a year+ ago but it's near Chrome's speed now, and with the stuff Mozilla has in development it's just going to get even faster still.  Using beta 37 now with a fairly large number of addons (even something bloated like ABP), and most sites are more or less instant to load now.  Massively slower was true a few years ago.. now that's nonsense.

Yeah I find firefox has improved a lot and is getting close enough to chrome these days speed wise.

 

I have to echo the above statements about switching from APB/ABE to ublock. This helps a lot *especially* on extremely heavy pages in firefox. For example I have a seedbox with an rutorrent webui and many seeding torrents.

 

With firefox + APB loading it totally locks up firefox for nearly a minute, the interface goes completely unresponsive.

 

Firefox + ublock (or no adblock extension) it comes up almost right away, just a hair slower than chrome.

 

APB kills performance on rendering heavy pages in firefox.

Error: you are using Adblock Edge. It is a resource hog. Try using uBlock (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock).

What version of firefox are you using? I believe the developer version has support for more media types than the current one.

normal release version - 36

Checking out ublock now

normal release version - 36

If I wanted to switch to ublock to check it out - what do I click on ?  I went to the link above and only saw a bunch of java script stuff

There's a link to the .xpi here: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases

 

also available on AMO: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock/

Former Firefox user here. I started using Firefox when it was Firebird 0.9.2. I thought Chrome was silly for not having a search box and didn't take it seriously for years.

 

Main reason I stuck with Firefox was the extensions. Chrome doesn't have Tab Mix Plus or TextArea Cache. For the latter, Lazarus just isn't as good. For the former, there are a handful of extensions that patch it over but it still falls short.

 

I switched to Chrome because Firefox was being a laggy monster on my home computer (AMD Phenom II dual core rig) whenever I used Facebook. At work it was fine, but my work computer is an i5 3570 quad core. Don't ask me why I have that much power, I certainly don't need it. Firefox does Facebook fine there, when I get time to make my rounds online. On both machines, Chrome performs admirably. So I started using it.

 

Plus, if you have a smartphone, Chrome syncs its bookmarks with Chrome on the phone. That's pretty cool. Firefox sync is garbage. And Firefox for Android is just bad.

 

I still kind of like Firefox, but I don't like their changes to search.

 

Now that I'm a Chrome user, I think either Firefox has to do something big to win me back, or Chrome has to do something wrong to push me back. But I keep both up to date. Especially since my wife prefers Firefox. And I don't hate Firefox or any of that crap... They're both tools and one works better for me, simple as that.

Firefox (on my hardware) more often than not renders pages faster than Chrome.. pretty much the only time Chrome beats it (again on my hardware) is on benchmark sites, and lately that's getting really close.   Extensions are 1000% better than the Chrome variants and usually provides more functionality as well.  Performance is almost as fast as Chrome and getting better with each release. Doesn't take up over a gig of memory just for a couple of tabs.  I can make the interface look how I want and not locked into what Google says.. no matter how crazy I want it I can do it, but with Chrome you're locked into that one layout, period.  I've used Chrome off and on but it just really doesn't give me anything that Firefox can't.  I do think their Android version's a bit better than the Android version of Firefox though, but I use Firefox there too for the syncing.  Getting really disappointed with Google in general lately as a whole. 

 

But that's just me, Chrome's a good browser too.

 

 

It's completely open source.

Mozilla's values are in the right place, and they are a non-profit.

It's faster than Chrome.

It's more lightweight than Chrome.

Gecko is awesome. I love it! (I develop for the web). It is very representative of how your site will look like in any modern browser. It conforms to the standards exactly.

Addons.

 

 

Firefox is much more customizable than Chrome. Chrome's extension are nothing compared to Firefox's add-ons. Chrome extensions can add a little functionality, but really doesn't change the experience. On the other hand, Firefox add-ons can change the browser completely. I feel like Chrome is becoming the 'new IE' as they're moving away from the idea of an open web to an idea that Google should be in charge of what the web is. 

 

I've been using Cyberfox, a 64-bit variant of Firefox as my secondary browser and it's feels snappier than Chrome.

 

I'll simply use those 3 replies as my answer. Can't spell it out any better than that!

 

Besides, Chromes bookmark menu is just absolutely ridiculous! It's to stupid to even alphabetize them, or, at least it used to be. Haven't tried it again in quite some time, except on my tablet, and then I still prefer Firefox.

I used Chrome for quite a while. But it kept breaking, whenever they updated stuff. They sneaked in App-shortcuts, added icons to my toolbar, broke some webpages (and fixed them again the next update) etc.

 

Simply put, Chrome was unreliable, so I switched back to Firefox.

Chrome on Windows > Firefox on Windows

 

Firefox on GNU plus Linux > Chrome on GNU plus Linux 

 

/thread

 

Any further discussion should be about my above statements. It will now forever be known as the "Johns browser principle." People will remember it in 50 years from now. They will misspell it as "John's browser principle" only to be corrected by a more knowledgeable peer that it is actually "Johns" without an apostrophe. That peer will have 15 seconds of pure, well-earned and well-deserved fame.

I recently tried to switch from Chrome to Firefox and had the following 2 issues that made me switch back.

 

1) Sites would "randomly" give me a "This Connection is Untrusted."  I say randomly because sometimes sites would work and other times they wouldn't.  The #1 response for a fix was that the time on my computer was wrong.  I had tried the browser on my work computer and my home computer.  Work PC has time managed by domain, home PC is wit time.windows.com.  Both would give me the error.  The #2 response was to whitelist the site.  I thought that would work for a site then it would go back to Untrusted.  Very frustrating.

2) Sites (e.g. Neowin) would be logged out when I revisited them after a day.  It was annoying having to continuously log into sites that would stay logged in with Chrome.

 

I really like to try change every so often to see if other choices have improved vs what I'm using.

On a modern machine if you can tell a difference in "browser speed" on Windows between IE, FF or Chrome then I'd argue you have much greater issues or are in a lab-benchmarking environment. I personally couldn't fault either (excluding Adobe ActiveX vs Adobe Plug-in performance/stability for Flash).

 

Feature wise, I do like Firefox Sync as it's a great multi-platform tool enabling me to take my browser favourites & settings with me to any desktop based OS I use - including my current Android phone. For that reason, I use Firefox more often than the others.

I recently tried to switch from Chrome to Firefox and had the following 2 issues that made me switch back.

 

1) Sites would "randomly" give me a "This Connection is Untrusted."  I say randomly because sometimes sites would work and other times they wouldn't.  The #1 response for a fix was that the time on my computer was wrong.  I had tried the browser on my work computer and my home computer.  Work PC has time managed by domain, home PC is wit time.windows.com.  Both would give me the error.  The #2 response was to whitelist the site.  I thought that would work for a site then it would go back to Untrusted.  Very frustrating.

2) Sites (e.g. Neowin) would be logged out when I revisited them after a day.  It was annoying having to continuously log into sites that would stay logged in with Chrome.

 

I really like to try change every so often to see if other choices have improved vs what I'm using.

I've never had either of these problems with firefox.

 

the connection untrusted thing usually means either something wrong with the site's ssl cert...

I've never had either of these problems with firefox.

 

the connection untrusted thing usually means either something wrong with the site's ssl cert...

Firefox does not use system proxy settings on Windows whereas Chrome / IE does.

Firefox does not use system proxy settings on Windows whereas Chrome / IE does.

I forget how it is in the older versions (not something I ever really look at), but in 37 beta it does.

proxy.png

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
    • So how did you solve the problem? Disabling Secure Boot isn’t a solution.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!