My OperaThe My Opera forums have been replaced with forums.opera.com. Please head over there to discuss Opera's products and features
See the new ForumsYou need to be logged in to post in the forums. If you do not have an account, please sign up first.
Opera 11.52 uses 476MB RAM w/ no websites loaded, IE 9 uses 24mb RAM w/ no websites, FF 7.0.1...
So here is an issue that I would appreciate some type of clarification on.My OS is Windows 7 Home Premium SP1, running on a few months old laptop with 2GB RAM.
I have following browsers installed on the system:
Opera 11.52
IE 9
Firefox 7.01
After launching Opera earlier today, I happened to check Process Hacker to determine what processes were consuming most memory.
I noticed that Opera was using a bit over 476mb, even though I had not yet started browsing the web with it (it is set to open to the Speed Dial). I then checked if Opera Unite was running (it was not enabled) and if I for some reason had a lot of extensions (I only have Ghostery 0.9.2).
So I thought that 476mb sounded quite high and decided to check how much RAM IE 9 and FF 7.0.1 consumed. I launched both of them and likewise checked the RAM consumption without loading any pages into either.
According to Process Hacker, IE 9 was using 24mb and FF 7.0.1 was using 40mb.
Screenshot of this is below (if it is not visible, it can also be found at: http://www.imagevimage.com/gallery.php?entry=images/opera_memory_consumption.png)
NOTE: after my initial post I went and disabled all Opera plugins (in about:plugins) and restarted Opera. The RAM consumption is less, but still 436mb with otherwise same conditions (i.e. the only "page" that is loaded is the Speed Dial, Opera Unite is off, etc).
So why does Opera use over 400mb when it is not even being used for anything????
11. November 2011, 23:19:01 (edited)
Just for testing if memory footprint lowers after start up:
a. set Opera to start with a blank page
b. try to start Opera with disk cache disabled
Internet Explorer's memory footprint you see is misleading. Basically it is much higher. The trick is that components of IE are part of the OS and are loaded with Windows. That's also the reason why IE seems to load decently fast if started. Most part of it is already loded at Windows start.
a. set Opera to start with a blank page
b. try to start Opera with disk cache disabled
Internet Explorer's memory footprint you see is misleading. Basically it is much higher. The trick is that components of IE are part of the OS and are loaded with Windows. That's also the reason why IE seems to load decently fast if started. Most part of it is already loded at Windows start.
Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed.
Every morning a lion wakes up. It knows it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death.
It doesn't matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle: when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.
Every morning a lion wakes up. It knows it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death.
It doesn't matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle: when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.
Hi Krake
thanks for your input.
I changed the "Startup" value to "Start with home page" and I also set my home page to "about:blank" and restarted Opera. It had a small effect, if any, on the memory consumption as Opera still took over 419mb.
I then decided to disable Disk Cache (in by navigating to the "Disk Cache" section in about:config and unticking the "Enabled" checkbox). This did not have any noticeable effect either, as Opera still takes about the same 419mb.
I agree with what you say about IE, but it is just that the memory difference is so large. And Firefox, that does not even get "preloaded" in the same manner as IE, still uses considerably less RAM than Opera.
thanks for your input.
I changed the "Startup" value to "Start with home page" and I also set my home page to "about:blank" and restarted Opera. It had a small effect, if any, on the memory consumption as Opera still took over 419mb.
I then decided to disable Disk Cache (in by navigating to the "Disk Cache" section in about:config and unticking the "Enabled" checkbox). This did not have any noticeable effect either, as Opera still takes about the same 419mb.
I agree with what you say about IE, but it is just that the memory difference is so large. And Firefox, that does not even get "preloaded" in the same manner as IE, still uses considerably less RAM than Opera.
Cold start on an ancient PIII test drive with 250MB physical memory.
Firefox 8.0 and Opera 11.52. Both browsers with same settings, no plugins, addons, extensions, user scripts or whatever.
The more physical memory is available the more Opera will grab. That's ok (for increasing performance) so long as Opera frees memory when a critical amount has been reached so it doesn't slow down your machine.
People encountering such slow downs should always check how other browsers work under the same conditions (e.g. dozens of open tabs, several flash sites etc) before complaining.
Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed.
Every morning a lion wakes up. It knows it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death.
It doesn't matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle: when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.
Every morning a lion wakes up. It knows it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death.
It doesn't matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle: when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.
"People encountering such slow downs should always check how other browsers work under the same conditions (e.g. dozens of open tabs, several flash sites etc) before complaining."
What the heck is that supposed to mean?
Any five year old who reads my original post can see that I mention 3 separate browsers, all starting with same conditions.
About Opera I wrote:
1. I noticed that Opera was using a bit over 476mb, even though I had not yet started browsing the web with it (it is set to open to the Speed Dial).
2. I then checked if Opera Unite was running (it was not enabled) and if I for some reason had a lot of extensions (I only have Ghostery 0.9.2).
About IE 9 and FF 7.0.1 I wrote:
1. I launched both of them and likewise checked the RAM consumption without loading any pages into either.
2. According to Process Hacker, IE 9 was using 24mb and Firefox 7.0.1 was using 40mb.
My original post also mentions disabling all plug-ins in Opera (even though these are not disabled in IE or FF) which did not take the memory consumption to below 400mb.
So obviously this is not some question of a situation with "dozens of open tabs, several flash sites etc".
With the exception of Ghostery (which was disabled in the tests mentioned in original post) my Opera installation does not have any add-ons, plugins, or anything else EXCEPT WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE OPERA INSTALLATION PACKAGE.
What the heck is that supposed to mean?
Any five year old who reads my original post can see that I mention 3 separate browsers, all starting with same conditions.
About Opera I wrote:
1. I noticed that Opera was using a bit over 476mb, even though I had not yet started browsing the web with it (it is set to open to the Speed Dial).
2. I then checked if Opera Unite was running (it was not enabled) and if I for some reason had a lot of extensions (I only have Ghostery 0.9.2).
About IE 9 and FF 7.0.1 I wrote:
1. I launched both of them and likewise checked the RAM consumption without loading any pages into either.
2. According to Process Hacker, IE 9 was using 24mb and Firefox 7.0.1 was using 40mb.
My original post also mentions disabling all plug-ins in Opera (even though these are not disabled in IE or FF) which did not take the memory consumption to below 400mb.
So obviously this is not some question of a situation with "dozens of open tabs, several flash sites etc".
With the exception of Ghostery (which was disabled in the tests mentioned in original post) my Opera installation does not have any add-ons, plugins, or anything else EXCEPT WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE OPERA INSTALLATION PACKAGE.
You are still using Opera? 
I had many problems with it (mostly with Flash: it is much slower then even in IE9 with the same consumption of resources). But I did not hear any solution for a long time. So now I'm using IE9, and check time to time new versions of Opera...
About this problem: Yes. Some people are right when are saying, that IE9 uses more memory in other hidden processes with Windows starting. But that processes are a part of Windows OS. Windows can't exist without some IE parts. So, no matter what browser do you use, that IE9 and Windows connected parts wll exists in your system and will use some RAM. But the difference is that this RAM will be using in any way (with any browser as a part of OS)... but with other browser you will have additional RAM used.
For example, IE9 uses 24 Mb after being started... and 120 mb are being used as components of Windows and IE9. So together = 144 Mb, right? (remember, this is example).
And when U are using Opera, it will take more 220 Mb + 120 Mb of processes of IE9 and Windows (cause that processes, as I sad earlier, are part of OS and use 120 RAM always after starting system). Together = 340 Mb (vs 144 Mb of using IE9).
So, yes... this is very clever trick from Microsoft. But it means, that it is better for RAM to use IE9, cause it is a part of OS... U can't delete it... it will always take its amount of RAM (no matter U use it or not)... and every other browser will use additional to this amount of RAM and summarily it will be much larger.
And please, don't forget, I was talking about only RAM issues... but there are many other problems (with Flash, as for me), that are not exist in IE9 (or in other browsers, like Chrome or FireFox).
And forget about support: All support is manifested only in the deleting (or closing) "unwanted" posts on forum
I had many problems with it (mostly with Flash: it is much slower then even in IE9 with the same consumption of resources). But I did not hear any solution for a long time. So now I'm using IE9, and check time to time new versions of Opera...
About this problem: Yes. Some people are right when are saying, that IE9 uses more memory in other hidden processes with Windows starting. But that processes are a part of Windows OS. Windows can't exist without some IE parts. So, no matter what browser do you use, that IE9 and Windows connected parts wll exists in your system and will use some RAM. But the difference is that this RAM will be using in any way (with any browser as a part of OS)... but with other browser you will have additional RAM used.
For example, IE9 uses 24 Mb after being started... and 120 mb are being used as components of Windows and IE9. So together = 144 Mb, right? (remember, this is example).
And when U are using Opera, it will take more 220 Mb + 120 Mb of processes of IE9 and Windows (cause that processes, as I sad earlier, are part of OS and use 120 RAM always after starting system). Together = 340 Mb (vs 144 Mb of using IE9).
So, yes... this is very clever trick from Microsoft.
But it means, that it is better for RAM to use IE9, cause it is a part of OS... U can't delete it... it will always take its amount of RAM (no matter U use it or not)... and every other browser will use additional to this amount of RAM and summarily it will be much larger.And please, don't forget, I was talking about only RAM issues... but there are many other problems (with Flash, as for me), that are not exist in IE9 (or in other browsers, like Chrome or FireFox).
And forget about support: All support is manifested only in the deleting (or closing) "unwanted" posts on forum
Originally posted by Usofoper:
I think a using a lot of physical memory is pay for speed.
What speed? What are you talking about!? Opera is much slower in Flash and in Scrolling than other browsers... and site opening speed is approximately the same as in other browsers.
Even if you are right, I just can't imagine how much Opera should be fast, to justify such issues!