If Anyone Doubted that Firefox Is a Huge Memory Hog...

Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, Camino, Mozilla, Netscape 6/7/8/9, and all Gecko-based browsers discussion and support forum.
(MozInfo701, Netscape Browser Archive)

Moderators: Antony, Edward, profman, Ramona

Postby Mandrake » Tue 05 Jan, 2010 2:54 pm

According to this page Firefox 3.0.x support ends this month. I wouldn't want to be running a browser that isn't updated to fix the latest security flaws.

RAM upgrading is really quite painless. You wouldn't add ram to your current setup, you would remove the old ram and replace it with new DIMMS of a higher capacity. By removing the old memory not having any free memory slots becomes a non-issue. A PC bought circa-2003 should use DDR ram.

There are two options for a RAM upgrade, depending on what your PC supports.

The first is a 2GB upgrade, with 2x 1GB DIMMS. Something like this.

The option, if your system doesn't support 1GB DIMMS, is a 1GB memory upgrade with 2x 512MB DIMMS. Something like this.

The prices are very reasonable, and you could even get a few dollars for your current ram if you were to sell it on eBay. You could also possibly upgrade with 4x 512MB DIMMS, but without knowing the specific model of your PC I don't know how many DIMM slots you support. It's fairly unlikely for a PC from 2003, but if your PC uses either RDRAM or SDRAM I wouldn't bother with any sort of an upgrade. The RAM in these cases is too expensive to buy in any sort of a decent capacity to make it worthwhile.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.6) Gecko/20091201 Firefox/3.5.6 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)
Core i7 920 | ASUS P6T Deluxe v2 | 3TB+ HDD | 12GB Corsair DDR3 | Radeon 4890 Xfire | X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty | Logitech Z-5500 Speakers | Dell 3008WFP | Seven RC1
User avatar
Mandrake
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4193
Joined: Fri 13 Sep, 2002 6:35 am

Postby Fulvio » Tue 05 Jan, 2010 11:21 pm

Thank you for the info. In the meantime I am running the latest available program, which works for me.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8pre) Gecko/20100102 Shiretoko/3.5.8pre
A minority may be right, and a majority is always wrong
~ Henrik Ibsen
WinXP, SP3, 512 MB, SM2.9.1, FF12, TB12.0.1, IE8.0, Google Chrome18, Ghostwall , Avast 7.x, JRE1.7_04. Testing FF13b3
User avatar
Fulvio
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 11915
Joined: Wed 19 Jun, 2002 10:08 am

Postby Antony » Thu 07 Jan, 2010 4:43 am

iJohnE wrote:Safari on Windows is light. Slow at page rendering, but light on the hardware. On the macs at school, especially the PowerPC ones it's a huge resource hog. Kind of ironic no?
PowerPC Macs are a bit old, and the Safari 4 does have quite a fair bit of fancy features, which demand some graphical power.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.6) Gecko/20091201 Firefox/3.5.6
User avatar
Antony
diamond member
diamond member
 
Posts: 14510
Joined: Tue 18 Jun, 2002 11:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby iJohnE » Thu 07 Jan, 2010 3:17 pm

Yeah, I know. The G4 macs work with Safari about the same way my Pentium 4 does. On the intel macs it's the same way, lightweight but slow.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20091221 Firefox/3.5.7 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)
Desktop: HP-Compaq DC7600: Intel Pentium D 945 @ 3.40GHz, 4GB DDR2 800 RAM, 500GB HDD, 160GB HDD, . nVidia ION ,Windows 7 Ultimate.
Laptop: Dell Vostro 3750: Intel Core i3 @ 2.30Ghz, 6GB DDR3 RAM, 250GB HDD, Intel Integrated Graphics, Windows 7 Ultimate.
User avatar
iJohnE
diamond member
diamond member
 
Posts: 1472
Joined: Wed 21 Nov, 2007 2:48 pm
Location: Pulaski, NY, USA

Previous

Return to Firefox, SeaMonkey and Netscape

Who is online

Registered users: Google [Bot]

cron