• MudMan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    It is not really faster than Chrome, but hey, at least I don’t have to manually opt out of monetizing my browsing history and my adblocker still works.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      1 year ago

      not really faster than Chrome

      Its also not really slower. If you are blocking plugins, it can be faster.

      Its fast enough I think is the broader point.

      • MudMan@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s a weird pissing contest that still makes people angry for no reason, is what it is.

        It’s not the 90s, you’re not trying to parse a bunch of tables on a creaking chunk of barely cooked sand. You’re basically running standalone software through your browser anyway.

        Honestly, the one performance thing that bothers me on any modern browser is that some extension in my stack somewhere is memory leaking and makes me restart Firefox to restore performance every few hours. Can’t tell which one, but I need all of them, so hey, frequent reboots it is.

        • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Once it’s slower, hit F12 -> memory -> snapshot

          Should be pretty easy to check out which extension has shitloads of storage. Then you can decide how to go from there - maybe contact the author?

          • MudMan@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Memory leak may have been a misdiagnosis. The issue is clearly with Youtube, which is what most extensions I use are about, there is nothing obvious in the memory snapshot (not that it’d be easy to see, because video is a resource hog anyway) and the profiler seems to label the stutter with the very useful label of “jank”, so…

            Someone more familiar with web dev than I am may be able to take the profiler logs and debug this, but a) that’s not me, and b) not my job.

            • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Jank means that the renderer was delayed due to a resource conflict - usually because there’s something on the main thread that’s taking too long. Basically your issue is probably a CPU (or GPU) one, not a RAM one - It’s hard to help you out without knowing more about your environment, so all I can really give you is vague advice: if you’re using an adblocker other than uBlock Origin, switch to uBlock Origin, it has much better performance. Check the plugins and extensions and make sure there isn’t something you don’t recognise, if your computer was compromised at some point, cryptominer plugins can really tank performance.

              • MudMan@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Figured that much. I’m not a web developer, but I can read a profiler, and the CPU usage spikes before those gaps are a pretty good sign that this isn’t a memory leak. I use uBlock Origin, by the way, but there’s likely some weird interaction between it, other Youtube extensions and Youtube’s own attempts to nuke adblockers from orbit. And no, it’s not a cryptominer as far as I can tell. This looks like either a bug or an unintended behavior of the very popular, very sanctioned plugins running on Firefox (or Firefox itself).

                Which is why, as I said, I have settled for periodic reboots. Convenience wins over principle often, but I happen to be stubborn.

                Gotta say, though, I appreciate the attempts at troubleshooting, but the OSS and privacy communities in general have a tendency to respond to comments on poor performance, compatibility or UX with tech support, and I think it’s kinda missing the point.

        • Little1Lost@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          i looked at the graph and it seems like the speed of firefox is way more stable. At the moment i think the normal speeds are equal. Chrome has sometimes very big spikes in booth directions (the grey dots on the right sides that seem to be out of order) so the fastes from the records is still chrome, on this one specific date

    • unalivejoy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is not really faster than Chrome

      It is if I close my eyes and stick my fingers in my ears.