Recommended Posts

Is it only me that when some images have some time of error, they simple don't show up?

That is a bit anoying since when we are seing some websites there is nothing that can tell us that should be there one image that is not working fine :s

Cheers

I had a problem like that, my router was causing it. Does it happen on every browser or just firefox ?

Scrolling really sucks in Firefox on Mac OS X. Instead of being smooth it jerks around when using a Magic Mouse or Magic Trackpad. In general Firefox' animations are awkward and nowhere near as smooth as throughout the rest of the OS and its applications, or completely missing. Yet another reason why using customs interface APIs instead of the native ones is a really bad idea.

Scrolling really sucks in Firefox on Mac OS X. Instead of being smooth it jerks around when using a Magic Mouse or Magic Trackpad. In general Firefox' animations are awkward and nowhere near as smooth as throughout the rest of the OS and its applications, or completely missing. Yet another reason why using customs interface APIs instead of the native ones is a really bad idea.

Not my experience. My Alu MacBook has perfect scrolling on nearly all sites I visit.

Not my experience. My Alu MacBook has perfect scrolling on nearly all sites I visit.

Compared to Safari, Finder, Mail, iCal etc. Firefox' scrolling is really jerky with inertia enabled. Firefox only scrolls smoothly when holding down my fingers without letting go when I move around. But when I give a flick with two fingers to scroll and inertia kicks in scrolling starts to stutter.

They really changed the about:config strings to make it almost unrecognizable for some settings compared to FF3.

I was trying to change the default search for the address bar to Bing by searching for the keyword.url as I used to, but now it is browser.search.defaultsearchengine.

Compared to Safari, Finder, Mail, iCal etc. Firefox' scrolling is really jerky with inertia enabled. Firefox only scrolls smoothly when holding down my fingers without letting go when I move around. But when I give a flick with two fingers to scroll and inertia kicks in scrolling starts to stutter.

I don't have any of that.

Needs a new option: "Are We Relevant Yet?"

Mozilla really needs to step up their game if they don't want to be left in the dust. FF4 is a joke at this point.

How exactly is it a joke?... Sure it's slow on development process... but it's still better then Chrome IMO. Firefox for me was lacking a bit in speed with Firefox 3. With Firefox 4 the speed has picked up a lot and is now the clear winner for me. Chrome is missing quite a few features I just cannot live without.

And what exacyly is the joke?Can you be more specific???

I don't know about you,but the only joke i see is your post Educated Idiot.Firefox is faster,has betterUI and a lot more options and addons than chrome(this is my personal opinion).For me on sunspider or kraken benchmark or in real life browsing FF 4 is better than chrome in any way.As Kaoxt said development is not as fast as we would like, but after FF4 they are going in a faster release cycle so this will not be a problem anymore.

Needs a new option: "Are We Relevant Yet?"

Mozilla really needs to step up their game if they don't want to be left in the dust. FF4 is a joke at this point.

To be honest I think 4.0 is a GREAT update. I considered using Chrome but ended up going back to FF4 :/ I might give Safari 5.1 another shot in Lion but we'll see... I'm not holding my breath

How exactly is it a joke?... Sure it's slow on development process... but it's still better then Chrome IMO. Firefox for me was lacking a bit in speed with Firefox 3. With Firefox 4 the speed has picked up a lot and is now the clear winner for me. Chrome is missing quite a few features I just cannot live without.

The current dev build in chrome is bit laggy for me, which is why I decided to finally go ahead and test out FF4b12 (originally was planning to wait until rtm since I had not need). Having used FF3 in the past, it certainly is a great improvement in performance, features, and customization (perhaps biggest key point here) and I am impressed despite their slow development. But overall, speed and performance is the most important for me, which is where Chrome excels (at least for the time being). FF4 feels very bloated at times and gets a bit laggy, partly because of the large initial memory load despite having 6GB of ram. It still lacks some of the innovative features that makes chrome so great, like the ability to manually add search engines, which is something I find essential for fast/convenient browsing. I will be back to using chrome by next week following this little experiment, but I still have faith that the mozilla team can make FF more competitive by the end of the year.

To be honest I think 4.0 is a GREAT update. I considered using Chrome but ended up going back to FF4 :/ I might give Safari 5.1 another shot in Lion but we'll see... I'm not holding my breath

I am one of the few people that actually likes Safari on Windows (the browser itself, not the crap it comes with). It has always been fast (as fast as earlier builds of Chrome, even) and looks decent enough to use full-time. In fact, I can't remember a single crash. I have, however, managed to crash Chrome a couple times, but that's another story.

Anyway, what I meant to say is the development of FF4 is a joke: one delay after another, 12 billion betas, engineers leapfrogging one-another, and so on. Mozilla itself isn't like it use to be, and I'm not even referring to Google's financial support. I don't know what happened to them, but I'm guessing the world passed them by while they were screwing around. That's the thing about the tech world (especially on the software side): you miss one month and it'll take years to catch up.

The browser itself is pretty reliable--It doesn't crash (much), websites render cleanly and I can't live without some extensions (i.e. Adblock+). However, it takes forever and a day for it to start up, and it takes even longer to get it working right. I think I spend more time tweaking and customizing the damn thing than I do using it, and that's a problem. I can't live with a slow, ugly browser.

I rag on Mozilla a lot because I am extremely dissapointed in them. I use to consider them one of the greatest companies on the web at one point, but now it seems like each department has its own agenda. It's just sad that they've lost focus and they're pulling in different directions.

Since people keep claiming Firefox 4 is taking so long, I decided to actually go and look up the time between versions.

1.0 to 1.5: 1 year, 20 days

1.5 to 2.0: 10 months, 25 days

2.0 to 3.0: 1 year, 7 months, 24 days

3.0 to 3.5: 1 year, 13 days

3.5 to 3.6: 6 months, 22 days

3.6 to 4.0 (now): 1 year, 1 month, 9 days

So yeah, the time between 3.6 and 4.0 isn't that bad, and isn't even as long as the time between 2.0 to 3.0.

People said the same things about 3.0 as they're saying about 4.0 (Taking too long, too many beats, irrelevant, etc.). And funnily enough 3.0 was also the release that set the world record for downloads :laugh:

How exactly is it a joke?... Sure it's slow on development process... but it's still better then Chrome IMO.

How FF development process is better than Chrome's? Google at least doesn't tease users with features they can't add in time and doesn't move release date forever ...

Needs a new option: "Are We Relevant Yet?"

Mozilla really needs to step up their game if they don't want to be left in the dust. FF4 is a joke at this point.

Its not joke , Mozilla had been very "open" with their public and that's how it has been , yeah i accept the development was very slow , but i can bear that if they deliver a very stable product (considering even nightlies are very very stable)

I remember when the first beta came , their wiki page said "w00t!" , that's mozilla and i love them this way :D

Since people keep claiming Firefox 4 is taking so long, I decided to actually go and look up the time between versions.

1.0 to 1.5: 1 year, 20 days

1.5 to 2.0: 10 months, 25 days

2.0 to 3.0: 1 year, 7 months, 24 days

3.0 to 3.5: 1 year, 13 days

3.5 to 3.6: 6 months, 22 days

3.6 to 4.0 (now): 1 year, 1 month, 9 days

So yeah, the time between 3.6 and 4.0 isn't that bad, and isn't even as long as the time between 2.0 to 3.0.

People said the same things about 3.0 as they're saying about 4.0 (Taking too long, too many beats, irrelevant, etc.). And funnily enough 3.0 was also the release that set the world record for downloads :laugh:

Several reasons why we claim it is too slow and is still a relevant argument:

-Chrome has been blazing along for the past year gaining a huge lead on performance while FF was lagging behind. This put extra pressure on Mozilla to push out a new release to at least maintain the gap, which they have taken too long relative to the pace of Chrome. The function of "long" is purely to the present rather than the past.

-At the time when FF3.0 launched, Chrome was still under development and was still a couple months away from launch. FF was considered the best browser available at the time until Chrome came along and changed the philosophy of web browsing. It forced people to decide which was more important to them: faster page load times and less system resource use for a basic browsing, yet highly responsive experience, or a decently fast and tons of addons for a more robust browsing experiences. This led to the major divide we see in the thread. Diehard FF fans said they could not live without their addons, while others like myself were willing to sacrifice addons to have the fastest web performance.

Also, it is one thing to download a browser, another to actually use it as default browser. I would not be surprised if FF manages to set another record with the FF4 launch, but the number of people who will actually use it every day is certain to be far below the number of downloads and installs.

Since people keep claiming Firefox 4 is taking so long, I decided to actually go and look up the time between versions.

1.0 to 1.5: 1 year, 20 days

1.5 to 2.0: 10 months, 25 days

2.0 to 3.0: 1 year, 7 months, 24 days

3.0 to 3.5: 1 year, 13 days

3.5 to 3.6: 6 months, 22 days

3.6 to 4.0 (now): 1 year, 1 month, 9 days

So yeah, the time between 3.6 and 4.0 isn't that bad, and isn't even as long as the time between 2.0 to 3.0.

People said the same things about 3.0 as they're saying about 4.0 (Taking too long, too many beats, irrelevant, etc.). And funnily enough 3.0 was also the release that set the world record for downloads :laugh:

Awesome find , also one must consider that Firefox 4 compared to Firefox 3.6 is AGGEESSS AHEEADD and the time taken seems less to me sometimes , its just that they failed to deliver products at the time they promised (or rather targeted in wiki notes and we took it as promise) , that's what made us feel they are slow , if they had said Firefox 4 would come next year Q1 , no one would have said development is slow

The current dev build in chrome is bit laggy for me, which is why I decided to finally go ahead and test out FF4b12 (originally was planning to wait until rtm since I had not need). Having used FF3 in the past, it certainly is a great improvement in performance, features, and customization (perhaps biggest key point here) and I am impressed despite their slow development. But overall, speed and performance is the most important for me, which is where Chrome excels (at least for the time being). FF4 feels very bloated at times and gets a bit laggy, partly because of the large initial memory load despite having 6GB of ram. It still lacks some of the innovative features that makes chrome so great, like the ability to manually add search engines, which is something I find essential for fast/convenient browsing. I will be back to using chrome by next week following this little experiment, but I still have faith that the mozilla team can make FF more competitive by the end of the year.

Firefox 4 (since preb13 builds) uses much much less memory than chrome , what innovation did chrome do? They went to the market , picked up fastest browser engine , added some features from each browser and tada! We have chrome ready to be served ! Even now with the latest version (11 i guess) they used tracermonkey like method , which again is an "innovation" by mozilla "used" by Chrome. Its just the omnibar , tabs on top and slight other changes which i accept , are innovative.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • AMD RX 9070 GRE AI, Blender benchmarks vs 9070 XT, 7800XT, Nvidia RTX 5070, 4070 by Sayan Sen Earlier this week, we shared the first part of our review of AMD's new RX 9070 GRE. It was about the gaming performance of the GPU, and we gave it an 8 out of 10. As a follow-up, similar to how we did with the 9070 XT and non-XT, we are doing a dedicated productivity review for the RX 9070 GRE as well, where we compare it against the 9070 XT, 9070, 7800 XT, as well as Nvidia's 5070 and 4070. This will include AI, rendering, compute, and more benchmarks. AI performance, especially, is a very important metric in today's world, and AMD also promised big improvements thanks to its underlying architectural improvements. We will be pitching it against the data we already have for the RX 9070, and RX 9070 XT, but also the Nvidia 5070 FE, MSI GeForce RTX 4070 VENTUS 2X 12G, and Gigabyte Radeon RX 7800 XT GAMING OC 16G as they are in a similar price class, but also because we do not have a comparable 5060 Ti card lying around here that we can compare it against. Before we get underway, this is a collaboration between Sayan Sen and Steven Parker, who lent me his test bed. Also, there was no editorial input from AMD. First up, the specs of the RX 9070, 9070 XT, and 9070 GRE, which were given to us by AMD: Radeon RX 9070 GRE Radeon RX 9070 Radeon RX 9070 XT Boost Clock: Game Clock: up to 2.79GHz up to 2.20GHz up to 2.52GHz up to 2.07GHz up to 2.97GHz up to 2.40GHz Stream Processors 3,072 (48 CU) 3,584 (56 CU) 4,096 (64 CU) Ray Accelerator 48 56 64 AI Accelerator 96 112 128 ROPs 96 128 Texture Mapping Units 192 224 256 Memory 12 GB GDDR6, 18Gbps Clock, 192-bit Bus 432 GB/s 16 GB GDDR6, 20Gbps Clock, 256-bit Bus Effective Memory Bandwidth: 640 GB/s Infinity Cache 48 MB (3rd Gen) 64 MB (3rd Gen) Card Bus PCI-E 5.0 X16 Output 2x HDMI 2.1b 2x DisplayPort 2.1a Power consumption 220W 304W Recommended PSU 650W 750W Slot width 2x 3x Price (SEP) $549 $599 As you can see from the specs above, it is less than the standard RX 9070 in every way that counts, except for slightly higher Boost and Game clock speed. Design Moving on, the RX 9070 GRE we were given is an XFX Swift triple-fan, dual-slot design with two 8-pin connectors. At 30cm (self-measured), it will fit in most systems easily. There is no RGB either. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE by XFX from all angles. Test system Our test system consists of the following: Lian Li O11 Dynamic Mini V2 Flow (Amazon|Newegg) ASUS Z890 ProArt Creator WiFi (Amazon|Newegg) Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus (Amazon|Newegg) Thermal Grizzly KryoSheet - 44x37 (Amazon|Newegg) 2x 16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB (7200 MT/s in XMP) (Amazon|Newegg) Sabrent Rocket4 Plus 2TB SSD (Amazon) Windows 11 25H2 (Build 26200.8246) AMD shared a press driver based on the recently released Adrenaline 26.5.2 that we were required to use. We now move on to our benchmarks. First up, we have Geekbench AI running on ONNX. For some reason, the 9070 GRE does exceptionally well here in both half-precision (FP16) and single-precision (FP32). It manages to beat the RTX 5070 and RX 9070 non-XT, and is only behind the 9070 XT. Since Geekbench runs in short bursts instead of continuously hammering the graphics card, it seems the GRE's faster boost clocks are helping here. Next up, we move to the UL Procyon AI test suite, starting with the image generation benchmark. We chose the Stable Diffusion XL FP16 test since it is the most intense workload available on Procyon. The Nvidia cards do very well here, as even the 4070 out-muscles AMD's best fairy easily. The positive thing about the GRE is that it gets quite close to the 9070 non-XT in this test; this indicates that the VRAM does not play a very big role here, as SD XL relies on float16 (FP16). So this is something to keep in mind again. If you wish to work with float32 AI workloads, graphics cards with larger than 12 GB buffers would likely emerge as victors. Regardless, the gains are still massive on AMD's 9000 series compared to the 7000 series. Following image generation, we move to the text generation benchmark. This is one test where the 9070 GRE struggled, quite a lot. It seems that the 12 GB VRAM and lower memory bandwidth of the new Radeon 9070 GRE are hurting it quite a bit; the split is massive, especially in a test like Llama2, which packs 13 billion parameters. As such, in all the tests, the 9070 GRE is the slowest of the lot. Next, we tried Blender, and here the AMD GPUs were beaten by Nvidia. Rendering is something the Green team has always had a lead over the Red side, and it has not changed so far. On the positive side, though, the 9070 GRE shows significantly better results than the 7800 XT, which means AMD is on the right path. Catching up to Nvidia, though, will require a lot more effort. And we hope HIP and ROCm can keep improving. Wrapping up AI testing, we measured OpenCL throughput in the Geekbench compute benchmark. The RX 9070 GRE alongside the 9070 did not fare well here at all, even falling behind the 7800 XT. Interestingly, even the RTX 5070 could not beat the 4070 on OpenCL, so perhaps this suggests that OpenCL optimization may not have been a priority for either AMD or Nvidia in the modern era. Conclusion We reached the end of our productivity performance review of the 9070 GRE, and we have to say it's a mixed bag. Unlike the 9070 and 9070 XT, the GRE excels in some areas while losing ground fairly easily in others. Similar to how it happened in gaming, any time the card's memory subsystem gets hammered, it tends to fall behind the others. This was the case with text generation, wherein we saw the VRAM sometimes hit its maximum available 12 GB of usage with larger model sizes. So what do we make of the RX 9070 as a productivity hardware? It can certainly be used, but you have to know it has its limitations. For those looking for a GPU that can deal with more, AMD recently unveiled the Radeon AI PRO R9700, which is essentially a 32 GB refresh of the 9070 XT with some additional workstation-based optimizations. On a similar note, the new Ryzen AI Halo platform is something you can consider if you want to set up a local AI processing station. Considering everything, we rate AMD's Radeon RX 9070 GRE a 7.5 out of 10 for its productivity performance. Price is less of a factor for those looking at productivity cases compared to those considering the GPU for gaming, and as such, we felt it did quite decently on many occasions and can be handy if you need a 12 GB GPU and, for some reason, don't want to get Nvidia. Purchase links: RX 9070 / XT / GRE (Amazon US) As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Does anyone here know if these updates are integrated into the UUP dump isos?
    • Motrix Next 3.9.4 by Razvan Serea Motrix Next is a modern, open-source cross-platform download manager built as the official next-generation successor to the original Motrix project. It has been completely rewritten using Tauri 2, Vue 3, TypeScript, and Rust, while still relying on the powerful Aria2 download engine for high-speed multi-protocol transfers. The app supports HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, BitTorrent, ED2K and magnet links, offering advanced features like multi-connection acceleration, task scheduling, bandwidth control, and batch download management. With a significantly reduced install size (around 20MB), it focuses on being lightweight, fast, and resource-efficient compared to traditional Electron-based download tools. Designed for Windows, macOS, and Linux, Motrix Next delivers a clean, modern UI inspired by Material Design 3 principles, with smooth animations and a minimal workflow. It improves usability through better download organization, system tray integration, and enhanced torrent handling including selective file downloads and tracker management. Motrix Next features: Multi-protocol downloads — HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, Magnet, .torrent, ED2K, and Metalink tasks BitTorrent — Selective file download, DHT, peer exchange, encryption controls, metadata caching, GeoIP peer flags, and tracker probing Browser extension integration — Embedded Extension API with independent authentication, download confirmation, smart auto-submit, filename hints, referer/cookie forwarding, and real-time controls (Chrome Web Store · Edge Add-ons) Safe filename handling — Content-Disposition, RFC 2047, non-UTF-8, percent-encoded, and extensionless URL resolution with path traversal sanitization Download organization — Favorite and recent folders, optional file-type categorization, stale-record cleanup, and completed history backed by SQLite Concurrent downloads — Independent controls for active tasks, HTTP connections per server, segments per file, and BT peer limits Speed control — Global and per-task upload/download limits with day-of-week and time-of-day scheduling System integration — Tray operation, optional tray speed display, macOS Dock badge/progress, protocol handlers for magnet://, thunder://, and motrixnext:// Lightweight mode — Destroys the WebView on minimize-to-tray while Rust keeps the engine, task monitor, notifications, history, and extension routing alive Notifications and power options — Native task start/complete/failure notifications, keep-awake during downloads, and optional shutdown after completion Network controls — Scoped proxy support for downloads, app updates, and tracker updates, plus system proxy detection Auto-update channels — Stable, Beta, and Latest Across Channels policies with separate download and install phases Diagnostics — Structured logs, exportable diagnostic ZIPs, database integrity checks, automatic DB rebuild, and Linux GPU rendering fallback Personalization — Light/dark/system theme, 10 color schemes, 26 languages, and first-launch system language detection Motrix Next 3.9.4 changelog: Motrix Next 3.9.4 promotes the 3.9.4 beta cycle to stable. This release refreshes bundled engine binaries, improves task detail readability and copy actions, expands link handling for magnet and ED2K workflows, polishes responsive navigation and text wrapping, updates browser extension documentation, and refines network preference controls. New Features Task Detail copy actions — Added copyable values for task metadata and reusable render functions for long text fields. Magnet and ED2K lifecycle support — Added task lifecycle handling for magnet and ED2K links. History cleanup for deleted tasks — Deleted tasks can now remove matching history records. User-Agent management — Added user-agent management and improved related network preference controls. Browser extension documentation — Added the Firefox Add-ons link for the Motrix Next extension. Improvements Engine binaries — Updated bundled binaries for supported architectures. Task Detail readability — Long task names, URLs, tracker values, and copyable metadata now render more clearly. Deletion messaging — Refined localized task deletion text for clarity and consistency. Text wrapping — Improved URI input wrapping and task name multiline display. Navigation layout — Improved sub-navigation responsiveness. Disk allocation default — Changed the default file allocation method to trunc. Proxy controls — Improved proxy button styling in network preferences. Download: Motrix Next 64-bit | ARM64 | macOS ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Links: Website | macOS / Linux | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NVIDIA officially supports Ubuntu, as linked above with the GeForce NOW Hands on I did in collaboration with Paul Hill.
    • TO be clear I am not running linux today, however I keep thinking about it. And I want to make sure there are minimal obstacles if I decide to make that switch in the coming months.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      244
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      66
    5. 5
      +Edouard
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!