Scott Hanselman

Finding a low-memory browser

January 09, 2014 Comment on this post [64] Posted in Musings
Sponsored By
Three Browsers and their memory usage

I'm testing a 4GB Lenovo Yoga Pro 2 this week and I'm finding I'm running right up against the 4 gigs of RAM in my daily work. I usually have Visual Studio open, a browser, and a few other apps. I have IE, Chrome, and Firefox pinned in my Taskbar and usually work in Chrome. I (this just happened to be) had these tabs open:

  • (work email), Gmail (home email),,,,,

Here's my task manager showing the Chrome "Canary" processes:


And here's the internal Chrome task manager (which is great!) showing what's really happening:


Certainly the memory used by my growing collection of Chrome extensions adds up. Some tabs that are "apps" like Gmail and Outlook use a 100megs or more. Regular "pages" (things that aren't heavy JS users) like Troy's blog or ArsTechnical use maybe 10megs.

If I run a small PowerShell script to collect the chrome.exe's and sum their physical memory use:

$m = ps chrome  | measure PM -Sum ; ("Chrome  {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))

I get about 1.6 gigs! On a 4 gig machine. Ouch.

C:\> .\memory.ps1
Chrome 1,623.08MB

Virtual Memory is even worse, at 6.3gigs! I start to trim the extension-fat by going to Tools | Extensions and disabling extensions I don't need now. If I'm debugging JSON, for example, I'll turn JSONView back on as needed.

Modifying my script to measure both Virtual and Physical Memory and running again with ALL non-essential plugins turned off.

C:\> .\memory.ps1
Chrome PM 1,151.72MB
Chrome VM 4,056.56MB

Big changes. Clearly the plugin thing can get out of hand quickly and running too many on a low-memory machine is a killer. I got a half-gig of memory back disabling my extraneous extensions.

Let me try the same seven sites in IE11 with no add-ons (extensions) enabled either:

IE      PM 604.11MB
IE VM 1,801.23MB

Nice improvement, less than half the VM and just over 600 megs PM. Now I'll try Firefox "Aurora." Again, same sites, logged in and running in the same state:

Firefox PM 426.58MB
Firefox VM 824.02MB

Nice. Some excellent memory optimization work happening at Mozilla it seems.

Of course, this is just 7 random sites that I happened to be visiting. Here's my poorly written PowerShell script memory.ps1

$m = ps chrome  | measure PM -Sum ; ("Chrome PM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))
$m = ps chrome | measure VM -Sum ; ("Chrome VM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))

$m = ps firefox | measure PM -Sum ; ("Firefox PM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))
$m = ps firefox | measure VM -Sum ; ("Firefox VM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))

$m = ps iexplore| measure PM -Sum ; ("IE PM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))
$m = ps iexplore| measure VM -Sum ; ("IE VM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))

It may be that these browser builds aren't all optimize for memory usage. I don't know. They were/are the ones I have on my machine and the ones I use. Your system, your sites, your browser builds, and your video card will change these results. Measure for yourself.

For me, I need more RAM. 4gigs just isn't reasonable no matter what browser you're running.

UPDATE: A commenter below says my results are flawed as I'm not taking into consideration how shared memory works. I am not sure (yet) I agree. Here is Chrome's about:memory feature. Who can offer thoughts?


About Scott

Scott Hanselman is a former professor, former Chief Architect in finance, now speaker, consultant, father, diabetic, and Microsoft employee. He is a failed stand-up comic, a cornrower, and a book author.

facebook twitter subscribe
About   Newsletter
Hosting By
Hosted in an Azure App Service
January 09, 2014 3:25
Reminds me of the time when I noticed that a single Gmail tab was using more memory than Outlook 2010 on my machine. Silly.
January 09, 2014 3:27
2 years ago, I discovered that only IE 8.0 was able to play movies without stuttering from BBC iPlayer on my 1.6 Ghz netbook. I was shocked. It was the first time I realized Chrome is not only consuming lots of memory, but it is also getting slower and slower with every release. I would already switch to IE, if not the synchronization that chrome offers.

Nice test btw.
January 09, 2014 3:40

I was just complaining about the same thing today on twitter. I am going to see how FF treats me for a while.
January 09, 2014 4:05
The great suspender ( was made to deal with this issue. I normally have 20+ tabs open at any one. Using this extension has given me back 4+GB of memory.
January 09, 2014 4:06
You can't accurately aggregate Chrome memory usage by summing the private memory used by each process. It uses shared memory which shows up duplicated between the processes.
For example, on my computer the Google Voice extension uses 15.4MB private memory, but 14.3MB of that is shared! Your results are flawed.

To properly measure memory usage of Chrome, go to about:memory or click that "stats for nerds" link in the task manager. Firefox probably can not be measured in the same way either but I'm not familiar with it.
January 09, 2014 4:28
Web apps will always be slower than native (yes, I'm saying that statement as absolute, hoping someone in the future comes back and laughs at this comment). In the end we'll see if it matters or not, but interpreting HTML/CSS/JS on the fly seems much more intense than code in native apps (on every single platform).

Totally with Hanselman on the idea that everyone needs more memory now. As everyone keeps running more and more "apps" in the browser, they're going to need more memory. In the case of phones/tablets especially though, they're going to be way better at memory usage as they're really only ever (fully!) running one app at a time. Maybe the web needs to start taking queues from the native app space and doing similar things.
January 09, 2014 4:45
Just about to pull the trigger on the Yoga Pro 2 and wondering if I could get away with the 4GB model. This answers it, important decision since you can't upgrade.

Otherwise would you recommend Scott?
January 09, 2014 4:48
Josh - Yes, with 256 gig SSD and 8 gig of RAM. There are still some wonky high-dpi issues, and I occasionally drop to 1080p and change to normal fonts when it gets too much. But it's a great machine and super light.
January 09, 2014 5:01
I was also debating the Sony Flip but I'm concerned about the keyboard flex issue.
January 09, 2014 5:25
Correct me in I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure if IE required more than 4 GB of system RAM to provide an acceptable experience then half of the Internet would riot and start shouting insults about how terrible IE was. Seriously, 4 GB?! I recall a time in the not so distant past when the operating system couldn't even access more than 4 GB.

Maybe I'm just an IE fanboy, but it seems people don't hold all browsers up to the same standard.
January 09, 2014 5:42
I have an 8gb Yoga 2 Pro (in orange) and it's awesome. I got the i5 since I didn't think the i7 was enough of a performance jump to justify the price, but I wouldn't dream of getting less than 8gb of RAM these days. I use IE11 primarily and occasionally Opera and have never had any memory issues from my browsers.

So far I haven't had to change the resolution to deal with any scaling issues, but some things get pretty tiny (but still clear). The trackpad is error-free for me, although I mostly use touch.

One problem with the trackpad gestures is that a rightward swipe too close to he left edge is registered as a left edge swipe, causing the last app to come full screen. Pretty unsettling and annoying after it happens several times. You can turn this off by going to Metro settings > PC and devices > Corners and edges > Turn option 2 "When I swipe in from the left edge, switch between my recent apps instead of showing a list of them" to off. Then you see the list instead and can abort of select the app you want, not just the last one. I like this better with touch as well.

That's my Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro mini-review. Hope you get one (in orange!) and like it @Josh.

January 09, 2014 5:43
I've found that (in Chrome at least) many of these "app" tabs like GMail use more and more memory over time the longer they have been open. Even after closing and reopening the browser (I have persistent tabs on) the memory footprint of these sites continues to grow. If I actually close the tab and reopen it every so often the GMail and other "app" sites seem to behave more appropriately.
January 09, 2014 6:14
Josh - the Y2P has been a great machine for me for over a month now. After working my way through a couple initial hiccups, it has been solid. Like Scott said, super light yet a solid build. Love the portability and performance.

VS 2013 runs great on it. I haven't had the need to drop to 1080p. From what I hear, battery life suffers compared to some other ultrabooks, but plenty good enough for my needs (6+?).

Best Buy had the i7 with 8gb ram and 256gb drive for a good price, and they've got a nice return policy if that concerns you.
January 09, 2014 6:27
Just tried the script on my Surface 2, with similar tabs open, removing the parts for FF and Chrome, and got the following results. PM 460.9 MB, VM 1483.67 MB. Pretty good memory usage. With just a single tab on Google, physical memory drops to 244 MB. Good job From MS getting the memory usage low, especially since the Surface2 only has 2 GB of Memory.
January 09, 2014 6:32
Might I suggest that you add Opera to the list of browsers to test for this kind of usage? Wasn't it their marketing tag to have a low footprint on the system?
January 09, 2014 6:41
This post made me realise why Chrome on Android doesn't yet support extensions.

Great post, I didn't realise how much of my RAM was being consumed.
January 09, 2014 7:20
Isn't this sort of "lower is objectively better" RAM usage comparison inherently flawed in modern versions of Windows? I was under the impression that the OS will automatically allocate less resources on systems that have lower overhead and more resources when you have more overhead.

So even if you "only" have 4 gigs of RAM available, as long as you're not doing anything else RAM intensive, the OS will allow Chrome to use the majority of it. I could be mistaken, however.
January 09, 2014 7:47
I haven't personally tried this chrome extension, but it sounds like it might considerably reduced chrome's memory usage while having multiple tabs open:
January 09, 2014 8:29
@Erick Girard - You could suggest it, but I doubt Scott has the time to test esoteric browsers that nobody uses anymore! How about we add Safari on Windows to that list next, huh? How about that?

#yolo #swag #screw-4-gig-ultrabooks
January 09, 2014 10:28
Try Opera if you want the Chrome's Blink engine, and also if you are not looking for a memory hog browser aka Chrome.
January 09, 2014 11:11
had the same problems with chrome half a year ago, now i'm trying opera.

but one question about the yoga2, i remember you hat a thinkpad yoga (at least for a lenovo hangout)

what would you say comparing these two laptops? why did you choose the yoga 2?
January 09, 2014 11:30
Great post!

Struggling with the same problems with chrome!

Totally agree with you regarding the shared memory!

January 09, 2014 13:12
I think Kitten is on the right track. In Windows Task Manager, "working set" includes all shared memory (i.e. 10 processes sharing the same 100M will individually look as is they have allocated 100M each). "Private Bytes" doesn't show shared mem at all, which I guess makes sense. The only reliable indicator I have found for shared mem, is Process Explorer's "WS Shareble" counter -- and that only includes stuff that hasn't been paged out. In other words, there really is no easy way of measuring exactly how much memory a given process has allocated. One will need to look at private bytes, virtual size and possibly working set.

January 09, 2014 13:53
At home I use Opera Next, and would be curious as to the results running the same tabs. At work I use IE11 and yeah, it's nice.

January 09, 2014 14:30
Yeah well... The trade-offs of switching browser is not always worth the effort.

I've been struggling with Chrome for a while: Chrome will lock up, and freeze until i forcefully close it... usually happens after sleeping the PC.

So i jumped over to Firefox to see if it was better - The problems immediately arose: The 5 most used websites ran terribly :( .. Firefox is my first choice because of Firebug. But the performance is just to damn bad, that it was unbearable.

IE11 runs pretty sweet, but the amount of addons and their quality just makes it the least favorite browser to use. The new developer tools are awesome - when they don't crash the browser...

so i'm back to Chrome :-/ ... and have purchased 16 Gig of RAM
January 09, 2014 15:04
Scott, how many plugins you have installed in FF and Chrome? I had to switch back to Chrome as my FF kept crashing. The plugins I use are Firebug, Kippt, Readability and Ghostery. Over time my FF was getting worse, crashing few times per day. My machine has 6GB of RAM.
January 09, 2014 15:18
You know how when you get a pay rise, you never really feel like you see the extra money. Your life changes little by little and that extra money is used up without you really realising. Memory seems to be a lot like this. No matter the technological evolutions, without much thought, I seem to find things to use up my memory :)
January 09, 2014 17:31
Hi Scott

You need to take a look at the ReadyBoost (USB) feature.

Just about 99.9% of the non-desktop devices (laptops, netbooks, etc.) that any developer would ever be stuck with will benefit from ReadyBoost.

The only thing that drives most Windows user nuts is the 4GB default setting while configuring ReadyBoost.

Here's an option to use your FULL USB drive space:

Finally, make sure that if your device is USB 3, use a USB 3 flash drive.

January 09, 2014 18:54
@T3h Ub3r K1tten (and Scott),

Shared memory is a bit of a double edged sword for counting these numbers. In your example Google Voice may have 14mb of memory that is marked as shared, but it may not actually be shareable. For example if you load files from disk (as resources) into memory they will get marked as shared. So if Google Voice is loading (for example) all of it's audio resources etc into memory then they will appear in the "shared" section but nothing else will ever make use of them.

You can see this in action by looking at the screenshot. The summary shows how much memory is actually being shared, and the tab details show how much memory can potentially be shared.
January 09, 2014 19:01
What you need is a dual computer. Use Synergy to connect two computers together. On your dev machine only have open what you need for development. On the other computer have your e-mail and browser open for when you need to do searches for what you are programming. Don't search on your dev machine!

I have two older computers (4G Acer and a dual boot Dell Dimension E510 running Lubuntu) that use Synergy which turns my two computers into a "single" powerful computer.

BTW, Synergy works better between Windows & Windows or Windows & Apple where you can even drag and drop items from one computer to the other. Another thing I have found useful is BitTorrent Sync for files that need to be kept in sync between the two computers.
January 09, 2014 20:16
At this point, IE11 pretty much destroys Chrome from a performance, memory usage, and CPU usage standpoint. I am consistently impressed by how well it runs on my Venue 8 Pro, even with its relatively weak CPU. I do think IE11's performance is somewhat dependent on using Windows 8.1 though, since IE11 doesn't seem to run as well on my Windows 7 laptop.

If they can just improve the developer tools (the new ones are much, much better, but still not great), and add a proper extension framework I don't see why anyone would use Chrome.
January 09, 2014 20:57
A good extension manager for Chrome is Extensioner. It allows for creating groups of extensions and enabling with a click. It's a good little tool. I am not always using the Eye Dropper, JSONView or other dev centric extensions so I have a tools group.
January 09, 2014 21:09
4 Gigs? Run linux on that machine instead of Windows! Kidding (sort of)

Just wondering which plugins you were running, I know Chrome Flash has overhead, in addition to any others you may have loaded up.
January 09, 2014 21:46
Are you using Chrome Canary proper? Or are you using consumer Chrome and just calling it Canary?

If you are running Canary, which is a bleeding edge developer version and may not be running as tight as consumer Chrome, I'd be interested in seeing the memory comparison.

I'm running both on my machine, but I only use Canary for debugging/profiling/working with a single web site at a time. I do all of my other browsing in Chrome proper.
January 09, 2014 22:48
Right now I have 22 (random) open tabs in Opera while Opera has 'just' a memory footprint of some less than 800 Mb.

Now I know why I don't use Chrome or Firefox anymore on my 4 Gig system. :)
January 09, 2014 22:50
As others have pointed out it's really complicated to figure out how much memory is being used by a particular app for a given scenario. 'Private Working Set' in Taskman was generally a good ballpark indicator but there are lots of cases where it can be misleading.

My personal favorite method is to use Mark's VMMap (Sysinternals) to empty an apps working set first, run through a scenario and then go back and look at how many pages were brought in as a result. The great thing with VMMap is the level of detail.

[Of course memory use is just one metric and often a tradeoff with other 'resources' like CPU, GPU or security protection like in the case of Chrome's multi-process architecture. Ymmv :)]

January 09, 2014 22:52
Thanks for the post. I have been thinking of using FF instead of Chrome to keep more of memory free because I have noticed recently how much memory Chrome is hogging.

Even some of my chrome web apps that I had were loading up as processes when booting up my computer and taking up a bit of memory. I have removed those web apps and disabled all extensions I am not using to get some of my memory back from Chrome.
January 09, 2014 23:15
Firmware and hardware exploits have been found in Lenovo PCs:
Members of the British and ­Australian defence and intelligence communities say that malicious modifications to ­Lenovo’s circuitry – beyond more typical vulnerabilities or “zero-days” in its software – were discovered that could allow people to remotely access devices without the users’ knowledge. The alleged presence of these hardware “back doors” remains highly classified.

January 09, 2014 23:41
Google 2014 reminds me of Microsoft 2003-ish.

Around 2003, Microsoft wins the browser wars, disbands the IE team to work on the next biggy, that'll kill the internet (source: the fabulous Douglass Crockford). 2013-ish: Google takes Lars Bak and some team members off Chrome/V8 to work on Dart.

The result of Google's action: my laptop fans spin chirp: not again! when I just open Chrome (talking Canary here)
January 10, 2014 0:03
This is exactly why I can't justify a Surface 2 Pro yet. I don't actually need 256Gb of SSD but I do need 8GB of RAM. In the UK, the jump in price from 64/4 @ £719 to 128/4 @ £799 might be OK if it also upped the RAM. To get 8GB you need to jump to the 256GB SSD coming in a whopping £1039.

.. that's all before I really start thinking that 16Gb should be entry level.
January 10, 2014 0:29
I'm using IE11 on my work PC (an old Pentium 4 with only 2GB of RAM) - it easily eats up RAM like a pig with any Web 2.0 sites and then I start paging like mad - but when I run Firefox or Chrome it gets worse more quickly.

I also bought (for home) the I7 version of the Yoga 2 Pro - awesome machine, fast, light, and no more worries with IE11 with the extra RAM and the SSD.
January 10, 2014 1:47
Like @Brad Wetness said, why is lower memory usage better, didn't we get over that mentality back with Vista?

Apps and the OS purposely use more memory for better performance. If memory is available it's better to use it then not use it.

Are actually seeing a performance issue there may be memory leak somewhere but if there is no performance problem and memory gets managed as is should in a modern OS is there even a problem?

January 10, 2014 1:50
Lenovo T530 with 8GB and IE11 screams along with no issues. My boss just started complaining about his machine freezing and chugging away -- the only app he has open is Chrome ... just goes to show you that shinier isn't always better.

If you haven't tried IE since version 8 you owe it to yourself to give IE11 a try. True, better dev tools would be nice but not often you can have your favourite cake and eat it too ... well sometimes you can eat it but feel really bloated afterwards.

Thanks for the article Scott, might be the straw to convince others in my company to stick with IE11 'cause it works.
January 10, 2014 2:11
As a SharePoint developer with a strong dependence on Hyper-V client, I'm reminded of Dr Evil's lamentation: "All I asked for was a shark1 with frikkin' laser beams2 on its head!"

Seriously, disk deduplication is great for hyper-v and constrained SSDs (256GB will easily act as 500GB), but without cold hard RAM, I cannot developer diddley squat without misplacing my faeces.

  1. IPS full hd touch laptop in 13.3"/14" in ultrabook format

  2. 16GB RAM

January 10, 2014 2:14
Press the 'Stats for nerds' link at the bottom of Chrome's "task manager" and you'll more easily be able to compare the private/shared stuff, because it will also show Firefox and IE in that table, like thus:
January 10, 2014 4:05
As several people stated, there are two issues here:
(a) The simple summing of memory for chrome processes is wrong (ignores shared memory)
(b) High RAM utilization is NOT necessarily a bad thing.

You seem to have about 25% of memory free for random stuff. The rest really should be utilized, instead of relying on fetching data from the web / disk. A real problem would be system was thrashing (page-faulting and swapping in pages from disk all the time).

How is your performance like?

I know from first hand that IE 11 still has terribly junky performance on both regular sites and webapps. I use it at work for some sites, and I administer several computers for the family. Even on fresh installs IE is really an unresponsive beast - and from an unscientific impression - with Gmail and ad heavy news sites, it takes about the same amount of memory as chrome.

4GB is not a lot for modern developer rigs. Web applications take up around the same as a desktop application would , if not more (for caching since js and web is slow). VS2013 is not horrible, but is still a huge IDE.

January 10, 2014 7:29
This article makes good sense to me. I was wondering why Google would overlook something as basic as that.
January 10, 2014 16:40
Was on the edge of buying a Win8 machine (touch) but decided properly working high dpi, great touchpad and lots of RAM and SSD would make me more productive. So I got my first mac (MBP), absolutely love it. Why futz around with a 4GB machine if you're a developer?
January 10, 2014 20:32
Scott, I think your PowerShell script is pretty cool. I just added some checks so it wouldn't give error messages if you don't have a browser running, and added it to my NuGet_profile so I could run it from the Package Manager Console in VS.

function Measure-Browsers()
$chrome = get-process chrome -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue
if ($chrome -ne $null)
$m = ps chrome | measure PM -Sum ; ("Chrome PM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))
$m = ps chrome | measure VM -Sum ; ("Chrome VM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))

$fox = get-process firefox -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue
if ($fox -ne $null)
$m = ps firefox | measure PM -Sum ; ("Firefox PM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))
$m = ps firefox | measure VM -Sum ; ("Firefox VM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))

$ie = get-process iexplore -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue
if ($ie -ne $null)
$m = ps iexplore| measure PM -Sum ; ("IE PM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))
$m = ps iexplore| measure VM -Sum ; ("IE VM {0:N2}MB " -f ($m.sum / 1mb))

January 12, 2014 15:52
My computer cpu xeon x5460 (9.5 x 418 = 3971Mhz), totaled 8.2 (cpu) score on windows 8.0.
January 12, 2014 21:42
In your search, you may want to look at the Avant browser for your Yoga2. Much faster and seems to use less memory than the browsers listed above.
January 13, 2014 4:27
Good to learn your work around. I have monitored Chrome as a memory hog, compared to Mozilla and IE. I was shutting down my chrome browser as a coping method. Now I can have the best of both Chrome and more memory.
January 13, 2014 10:01
I have write a post in November, but my concern is score not the memory usage. IE is off-course use very less memory. Here is my result
January 13, 2014 18:47
It seems with every release of Chrome its getting feature bloat. I have found it more and more buggy with recent releases while using more resources.

I think its time for them to focus more on reducing resources and fixing bugs than adding new things. It might even be good to remove features that aren't popular, perhaps making them into some kind of extension.

For me I always preferred firefox mainly because of the much richer addons, chrome users should give it and other browsers another try things have changed a lot since Chrome was king.
January 15, 2014 0:55
You can also save some memory by disabling the new tab interface and switching to be a "blank" new tab.
January 15, 2014 11:34
Noticed this issue a while back and had switched to FF, thanx Scott, for bringing this into the open.
January 15, 2014 12:21
The browser is the new OS so why would you reserve any memory from it :) And while Chrome might be not the best browser, it is by far the best OS (out of IE/FF/Chrome) and Google is pushing it that way even harder. Your OS works best with 8gb ram if you are a 20tabs+10extensions user. It's 2014, get over it.
January 16, 2014 2:34
I'd love it if someone on the chrome team could comment on these memory issues, and if they are actively looking at this - it's becoming mentioned along with allegations of reduced performance more and more..

January 17, 2014 6:41
Hi! try to use opera with (elder render motor) since they move to webkit is awesome too but it takes a lot of memory (lesser than chrome) or safari!
January 23, 2014 2:03
Memory isn't good, but select <option> With non-scrolling scroll bar is unforgivable. Just updated chrome for this little treat. Gooooooo chrome dev team!
January 30, 2014 0:33
+1 for ReadyBoost - adding a 2 GB USB cache to my 4 GB laptop has made Visual Studio noticeably more responsive.
January 31, 2014 10:39
quote: "4gigs just isn't reasonable?"


if that isn't enough for a browser the browser is BLOATWARE (to the extreme!)

a nice feature I wish browsers had is some kind of setting to put a limit on ram it is allowed to use
(sure it might break some pages with way-too-hungry javascript or flash but if they need that much those pages need fixing anyway! - and letting them break by default might encourage people to fix their pages!)

In these recessionary times 4G RAM on a desktop pc is still regarded as pretty decent by most people!

January 31, 2014 16:49
I'm with Michael, 4GB seems pretty reasonable to me. I guess it depends on the user's habits, but Chrome can be a real hog.
March 30, 2014 17:34
I was having problems with my HP 8510p running FireFox, it was running my processor full blow, and took up nearly all the 4GIG of Ram I have on this machine. I dislike IE so that was out of the question, then I recalled using a FF spinoff called Pale Moon, installed that and have never looked back. It takes most of the FF add on's but isn't so processor or memory hungry. Another I have used in the past that gave good satisfaction was bit comet, another FF spinoff that works very well and fast, has a nice look and feel and like Pale Moon, takes most of the FF addon's.

Comments are closed.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in any way.