3 ms·
I'm not sure that the doubling guess is going to be accurate. The majority of that 130MB is going to be in the overhead of keeping a seperate copy of Chromium i
by JimmyAustin 10y ago
I'm not sure that the doubling guess is going to be accurate. The majority of that 130MB is going to be in the overhead of keeping a seperate copy of Chromium in memory, not in the implementation of current features.
- LnxPrgr3 10y agoMy experience with Web browsers is they expand to fill all available memory and then some. This Firefox process has grown more than 50% since launch, and will stay mostly that big even if I close all but one new tab. Chrome does a better job of containing the damage to individual tabs, but I'm not how much that really helps with something like this. And of course, eventually I still end up killing Chrome periodically to get RAM back for real work, like running VMs without the host thrashing.