you sound like an advert. i'm already aware of those links and they did nothing for me performance wise. the 2nd link is for privacy tweaks. shouldn't have to do all that bs, firefox has been getting more and more bloated, it's like microsoft are running the business instead of mozilla... i configured it correctly and it was not the best browser. do explain, why quantum, chrome, opera consume gigabytes of memory? when pale moon and possibly other non big name browsers don't. it's because they are unoptimized, full of extra background scripts etc. as i said i have more or less an identical selection of addons on both browsers, yet one uses 1gb+ and pale moon hovers around 5xxmb. just wish i discovered pm ages ago would've saved me lots of browser testing & switching......
Errrm, for FF it's the new Multi Process design (electrolysis), no clue about the others. Disable it and you have the behavior of pre-quantum versions like Palemoon. https://forums.mydigitallife.net/th...-17763-1-107-pc-r.77945/page-215#post-1489077
PM uses single thread while firefox quantom uses multithread so each add on is a new process. that's why it takes a lot of memory. If you continue having PM open, eventually the memory PM takes will be over 1G. Also quantom firefox is not that fast, under SSD, almost all browsers are fast, including PM and old version of firefox (v56). I found another browser called K-meleon, using PM render engine Goanna now and it's very fast and takes low memory. Not many addons though, so I only use it for casual browsing.
user.js + uMatrix + uBlock Origin + delete all .xpi = performance Firefox 52 (and probably Pale Moon) does use much less RAM but in my experience is less responsive than Firefox 60. Go figure. My computer has 4GB of RAM and I prefer Firefox 60 over Firefox 52 performance-wise. Loading all my bookmarks at once takes 1.5-2GB of RAM (~40 tabs). Windows 7 takes 800MB.
Icy007 I agree completly with RanCorX2 as i have tried out Firefox Quantum i also give up onto Opera ,Vivaldi and a lot of others Most of the time i use commodo dragon & iron 64 bit,they are good but not perfect I also use IE explorer 11 sporadic i use Qtweb and BrowzarWinstyle2000,this is based onto the core off IE explorer, no active x,cleanup of index.dat,cookies,history,flash & java data when closing ,a bizarre browser,worth a try i am going to try Palemoon now, i used it many years ago
Well, the memory leak on FFQ has been a sore point since version 57. Die hard FF fanatics will treat it as a normal behaviour. The problem is, atleast for me that FF nowadays have a lot of visual elements. Just disabling animations make RAM usage & CPU usage bit lower. I really love FF & what it can do. But at the end of the day it lacks too many things that I need. And for other chromium browsers, you can try Cent Browser.
No wonder, only Chrome is able to handle the propriatary system correctly, FF needs the addon and edge a user script via greasemonkey to fallback to the old youtube 'engine'.
Have been using pale Moon since early 2011, and don't have much use for any others. Especially any thing built on Chrome. Have 87 add-ons enabled and 32 tabs open using 577 MB memory.
^^^^I certainly can' hold anythig against you. I'e been rather disturbed at Mozilla a few times over the past year, like when they blew away my profile and then my wife's with some s**tstorm of an update.... or when they started bumping off add-ons, like DOWN THEM ALL! I cn say with 100% convicton that mozilla firefox SUCKS HARD! Have you used any of the "chromium" bosers? (I suppose not since you said "anything based on chrome". I'd be kind of disappointed losing x64 though...
Palemoon is simply another Ff version, where you sooner or later run into more and more extensions, that will not work there... I think I am up to seven other versions I have wasted my time on.