Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Decopi" data-source="post: 750252" data-attributes="member: 67091">Nothing against your preferences. The definition of &quot;the best&quot;, always depends on the user-profile, not in the product. So, without questioning your preferences, I just would like to share with you some info:1) At Firefox you can customize the number of &quot;content processes&quot;. For example, if the user in average needs 20 opened tabs, then he can use 10 processes for better performance. And if he needs 4 tabs, he can use 1 content process consuming less than 300MB. Not to mention that also is possible in Firefox, without add-ons/extensions, to &quot;hibernate&quot; tabs, downsizing RAM and CPU to the lowest rates in the market.2) If you have more than 5GB RAM, then RAM not always is important when we talk about system-performance. But CPU is important. Firefox has WebRender option. That means, if user wants, he can transfer most of the CPU resources to the GPU resources. This will make CPU almost zero. And for browsers GPU always is and will be more efficient than CPU. Firefox can work in the computer as a video-game. Now, ask yourself why video-games use GPU and not CPU.3) Browser structures are trending &quot;to isolate processes&quot; (every webpage will have its own process). This will be a tremendous pressure for CPUs, but not for GPUs.Conclusion: Firefox is a matter of customization. If users don&#039;t love to read/learn how to customize, then other browsers are best for them.The irony here is that Firefox is so customizable that can be transformed in a kind of GoogleChrome. But the opposite, is impossible.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Decopi, post: 750252, member: 67091"] Nothing against your preferences. The definition of "the best", always depends on the user-profile, not in the product. So, without questioning your preferences, I just would like to share with you some info: 1) At Firefox you can customize the number of "content processes". For example, if the user in average needs 20 opened tabs, then he can use 10 processes for better performance. And if he needs 4 tabs, he can use 1 content process consuming less than 300MB. Not to mention that also is possible in Firefox, without add-ons/extensions, to "hibernate" tabs, downsizing RAM and CPU to the lowest rates in the market. 2) If you have more than 5GB RAM, then RAM not always is important when we talk about system-performance. But CPU is important. Firefox has WebRender option. That means, if user wants, he can transfer most of the CPU resources to the GPU resources. This will make CPU almost zero. And for browsers GPU always is and will be more efficient than CPU. Firefox can work in the computer as a video-game. Now, ask yourself why video-games use GPU and not CPU. 3) Browser structures are trending "to isolate processes" (every webpage will have its own process). This will be a tremendous pressure for CPUs, but not for GPUs. Conclusion: Firefox is a matter of customization. If users don't love to read/learn how to customize, then other browsers are best for them. The irony here is that Firefox is so customizable that can be transformed in a kind of GoogleChrome. But the opposite, is impossible. [/QUOTE]

Verification