Upcoming Firefox 57 ("Quantum") is twice as fast as Firefox 52

Associate
Joined
15 Feb 2008
Posts
1,321
RAM benefits have been on a few versions for a while now. I was on 55 before and noticed it only uses some 300MB RAM vs what previous versions used to which was closer to 1-1.5GB.

I've ditched all themes (Classic Theme Restorer) and most of the old extensions I used to have in favour of web extension versions and the built in dark theme. Looks clean, is minimal, and no nonsense.

@mrk which extensions are you using if you don't mind.

I prefer the clean look rather than buttons all over the toolbar.
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Dec 2002
Posts
23,299
Location
In a cowfield, London, UK
Been using FF since the Pheonix days. Last year I got tired of the sluggish direction Mozilla were going with FF so I went over to Chrome, which was snappy and fast. I missed FF's more flexible extensions though and blimey FF 57 is amazing to use. I had scrolling issues on a few forums with the old FF builds, which aren't present now. Ditched my legacy extensions too and am happy with the memory footprint of the browser so far - 35mb with 3 forums loaded!
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Mar 2010
Posts
21,781
Soldato
Joined
15 Dec 2002
Posts
23,299
Location
In a cowfield, London, UK
Yeah I realised moments later as I saw some additional processes in task manager. Memory usage in total was about 300mb or so. I'm still fine either way really, as long as they continue working on the speed and keeping the browser from being bogged down months after an install.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Mar 2010
Posts
21,781
Is the E10/multiprocessor 57 version instrinsically less secure(easier to compromise) than predecessors ?
I assume, last pass not yet supported because they cannot guarantee shared memory access is protected as passwords are accessed from multiple sites

Although add-ons are signed, a good (generic) attack vector is having one malware enhanced add-on that snoops on another.

I understand noscript should work in 57, but I would like an option where you can 'allow' one site to access another eg. googleapis, but, do so, without allowing tabs on other sites to re-load, because they have some non-essential scripts that also use that site.
... from previous discussion here, I am not sure there are many noscript users though. (you maybe able to accomplish this with ApplcatiionBoundaryEnforcement, but that is manual)
 
Associate
Joined
15 Feb 2008
Posts
1,321
Shame Last Pass isn't supported yet, bit of a deal breaker for me.

have recently made the move from Lastpass to Bitwarden and have to say I have noticed no difference .... infact the bitwarden add on works much smoother than the lastpass addon imo.
 
Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2009
Posts
2,582
Location
İzmir
Just made a separate profile for the 57 beta, and got nearly everything set up to how I like it. Seems much better. Just waiting on a few crucial extensions like LastPass.
 
Associate
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Posts
433
I only use Firefox these days as it easier to change cache location and constant read writes to a drive i like. Im unaware if goggle do this? I would never leave Firefox and speed has never been an issue for me its always had what i wanted. I hope it stays the same?
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Oct 2009
Posts
16,548
Location
Greater London
I only use Firefox these days as it easier to change cache location and constant read writes to a drive i like. Im unaware if goggle do this? I would never leave Firefox and speed has never been an issue for me its always had what i wanted. I hope it stays the same?
They changed the settings layout and I noticed a few settings are now missing (hardware acceleration was a major one I noticed). But you still can change these things in about:config. As far as I know Chrome still doesn't allow this so cache is stuck on the main drive.

So due to my desktop being out of action I've hooked up my Surface, and noticed FF was incredibly laggy when I had a Youtube video playing on the other screen. For some reason it has set the default content process as 1 :confused:. Increased it and no more performance issues, but why did FF decide 1 was the best? Actually saying that, it decided 1 was the best for my desktop as well, the only time I saw it default to 4 was my work PC.
 
Associate
Joined
4 Jun 2015
Posts
247
Location
Watford, Herts
They changed the settings layout and I noticed a few settings are now missing (hardware acceleration was a major one I noticed). But you still can change these things in about:config. As far as I know Chrome still doesn't allow this so cache is stuck on the main drive.

So due to my desktop being out of action I've hooked up my Surface, and noticed FF was incredibly laggy when I had a Youtube video playing on the other screen. For some reason it has set the default content process as 1 :confused:. Increased it and no more performance issues, but why did FF decide 1 was the best? Actually saying that, it decided 1 was the best for my desktop as well, the only time I saw it default to 4 was my work PC.

Hardware acceleration is hidden under the performance heading in general settings. You have to untick use recommended performance settings, but it is on by default anyway.
 
Back
Top Bottom