Recommended Posts

Anyone else noticed huge performance problems with Firefox 38 over previous versions?

 

I noticed it when I had a dozen or so pages open and playing a video using a flash player. Not sure if it is Firefox or Flash as Flash silently updates itself. Just wondered if anyone else has seen this too?

Flash in Firefox has been all sorts of terrible for the last 4 or 5 versions now. Not sure where the problem is either - but having 2 windows of Firefox open (one on each monitor) - if one is a flash video and the other just browsing, every time you load a page the video stutters.

 

Doesn't happen in any other browser.

  • Like 2

Anyone else noticed huge performance problems with Firefox 38 over previous versions?

 

I noticed it when I had a dozen or so pages open and playing a video using a flash player. Not sure if it is Firefox or Flash as Flash silently updates itself. Just wondered if anyone else has seen this too?

 

I did. I installed Disable Flash and the problem is solved ;)

Flash: The bane of the Internet, strikes again.

yep.

 

there are only 2 reasons I still have flash installed

1. Twitch

2. the Anime website I use doesn't have html5 players yet (and I haven't found a site I like better)

According to Ars Technica, switching on tracking protection reduces page load times in FF by up to 44%.

 

Just go to about:config and double click on privacy.trackingprotection.enabled to set it to true.

 

Might be worth pointing out that enabling the tracking protection in Firefox will also make it block a lot of ads automatically such as the ones on Neowin.

I'm not sure if it's just me but have web browsers become an entire world of pain in the last couple of years, or what? I use both MacOS X and Windows both at home and work. 

 

My PC at home is an old i7 with 8GB RAM and a GTX560Ti video card, and a fairly crap-free install of Windows 8.1 Firefox on that is utter crap - it's so slow, flash videos reduce the whole machine to a crawl. I'm finding similar nonsense lately in both Chrome and even Safari which, up until now, had been extremely slick and smooth.

 

But Firefox is definitely the worst offender by some margin. It's bordering on un-usably bad these days. And whilst I accept my old desktop PC isn't a power house, it's not exactly a dinosaur and should be able to run a web browser without being bought to it's knees!? 

I'm not sure if it's just me but have web browsers become an entire world of pain in the last couple of years, or what? I use both MacOS X and Windows both at home and work. 

 

My PC at home is an old i7 with 8GB RAM and a GTX560Ti video card, and a fairly crap-free install of Windows 8.1 Firefox on that is utter crap - it's so slow, flash videos reduce the whole machine to a crawl. I'm finding similar nonsense lately in both Chrome and even Safari which, up until now, had been extremely slick and smooth.

 

But Firefox is definitely the worst offender by some margin. It's bordering on un-usably bad these days. And whilst I accept my old desktop PC isn't a power house, it's not exactly a dinosaur and should be able to run a web browser without being bought to it's knees!? 

 

It is hard to tell. Websites are so much more complicated than they were just a few years ago. They are JS crazy. We have seen a lot of amazing gains in JS performance thanks to Chrome for giving Mozilla a kick up the ass. And we have seen things like asm.js from Mozilla. Personally I find Chrome to be the worst performer, at least on Windows.

 

I like Firefox. It works well and until this issue I have not had any reason to complain about performance. Flash is the biggest offender. I wish I could get by without it but so many sites (looking at you BBC News) need Flash for their embedded video which sucks.

 

Most websites are not really sites anymore but full blown applications. Things like Outlook.com, Office Online, Dropbox, etc. are applications not sites.

 

My only computer is a 2.53Ghz Core 2 Duo mobile (T9400), 4GB RAM and an awful ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 256MB but Firefox still performs well even with 40+ tabs open which I often do. Considering how much a web browser has to do these days I think it performs pretty good.

 

Now if you want to talk about extensions and plugins then that is a different story! Some extensions can kill Firefox and Chrome in a few minutes. It is shocking. I wish Firefox had a default profiler for extensions that alerted you if an extension is slowing the browser down. I know there are profilers for this but I want something built into the browser that works automatically and has a simple prompt to the user with something like "Extension XYZ is causing Firefox to perform badly, do you want to disable this extension?". Simple.

It was originally Safari that kicked off the JS performance race (SquirrelFish is still the best name for a product I've ever heard), since then they've all caught up and now we're talking about performance differences of like 1.5ms on microbenchmarks.

Anyway, go to about:support and look at the graphics section, generally you want OMTC enabled, Direct2D enabled, DirectWrite enabled, and Direct3D 11 compositing enabled. If some of those aren't enabled you'll be using software rendering for some things, and that's slow (And one known performance regression in 38, people with awful GPUs that hit a pathologically bad performance issue in system libraries)

I have the opposite problem.

 

while chrome appears to be fast at time. it eats almost 100% when loading pages. so my cpu fan revs up and down when using chrome.

 

also sometimes for no reason on my end, it will decide not to load pages correctly . sometimes that happens on neowin. I go over to firefox and website is fine.

 

but I have not used ie 11 or sparten(edge) much at all.

 

 

firefox seems to load at great and stable speed.

Firefox overall is pretty fast for me, the only time I notice a performance hit is on the really script-heavy sites (Outlook, Amazon, etc) and it's not that bad unless I have a few tabs loading them at the same time.  Aggressive filtering probably helps too, a lot less for it to deal with.  Flash hasn't been an issue for me, but I usually keep it disabled too, have the "FlashDisable" addon so I can toggle it on and off via a click on the toolbar, wish I had that in Chrome, but I only frequent like 2 sites that still require it anymore anyway, never mind keeping it off normally for security reasons. 

All browsers suck, some less than others.

 

There are too many variables. Badly coded JavaScript, crappy plug-ins (I'm looking at you, Flash), resource-hogging browser extensions.. it all adds up. In the end you have to find the right compromise to find the right browser for you.

 

Ironically Firefox is among the most lightweight major browsers today, despite the age-old accusation of 'It's bloated!'

When I first updated to version Firefox version 38 on one machine of mine, it was so slow it was useless. Did some searching and found that disabling hardware acceleration was what I needed to do. It's a known issue in that version for some people.

 

I know flash is a total POS, but hard NOT to have it installed still but it's so easy to simply disable and enable when needed, i don't even consider that to be a problem.


I'm not sure if it's just me but have web browsers become an entire world of pain in the last couple of years, or what? I use both MacOS X and Windows both at home and work. 

 

My PC at home is an old i7 with 8GB RAM and a GTX560Ti video card, and a fairly crap-free install of Windows 8.1 Firefox on that is utter crap - it's so slow, flash videos reduce the whole machine to a crawl. I'm finding similar nonsense lately in both Chrome and even Safari which, up until now, had been extremely slick and smooth.

 

But Firefox is definitely the worst offender by some margin. It's bordering on un-usably bad these days. And whilst I accept my old desktop PC isn't a power house, it's not exactly a dinosaur and should be able to run a web browser without being bought to it's knees!? 

 

Sheesh! If that's your OLD machine, can I have it? Out of the 7 Windows machines I have, none of them are any where near that new/modern, but they all run just fine! ;)

I have also noticed some performance issues with Firefox in the past few months.  Every so often when I go to the Android Police website to check on phone news my mouse cursor pauses for around 4-5 seconds then resumes as normal.

 

Just tried Android Police and it works fine for me. No mouse lock ups or anything. The site is pretty heavy though I agree.

I noticed Firefox doesn't repaint the tab - I switch from tab A to tab B. First I still see tab A and then, partially at first, tab B's content starts showing.

Very annoying.

 

But, I hope everyone realizes, Firefox is becoming ad-supported and some major developers left.

I noticed Firefox doesn't repaint the tab - I switch from tab A to tab B. First I still see tab A and then, partially at first, tab B's content starts showing.

Very annoying.

 

But, I hope everyone realizes, Firefox is becoming ad-supported and some major developers left.

 

I thought this was one of my add-ons. Guess not.

...

But, I hope everyone realizes, Firefox is becoming ad-supported and some major developers left.

That did not happen.

Edit: I mean, a few devs have left, but they've hired other devs, you don't spend your entire life making a single program.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Stellarium 26.2 by Razvan Serea Stellarium is a free open source planetarium for your computer. It shows a realistic sky in 3D, just like what you see with the naked eye, binoculars or a telescope. It is being used in planetarium projectors. Just set your coordinates and go. Stellarium key features: Realistic simulation of the sky, sunrise and sunset Default catalogue of over 600,000 stars Downloadable additional catalogues for up to 210 million stars Catalog data for all New General Catalogue (NGC) objects Images of almost all Messier objects and the Milky Way Artistic illustrations for all 88 modern constellations More than a dozen different cultures with their constellations Solar and lunar eclipse simulation Photorealistic landscapes (more are available on the website) Scripting support with ECMAScript (a few demo scripts are included) Extendable with plug-ins: 8 plug-ins installed by default, including: artificial satellites plug-in (updated from an on-line TLE database) ocular simulation plug-in (shows how objects look like in a given ocular) Solar System editor plug-in (imports comet and asteroid data from the MPC) telescope control plug-in (Meade LX200 and Celestron NexStar compatible) The major changes of this version: Added new sky culture Added new plugin: Planes Many improvements in plugins Many improvements in Core and GUI Many updates in sky cultures. [full release notes] Download: Stellarium 26.2 (64-bit) | 456.0 MB (Open Source) View: Stellarium Home Page | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      418
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!