6 ms·

Congrats Mozilla on the release! Odd title though for this post, for where is the "everyone"? The link shows comparisons to previous versions of Firefox, not o

Congrats Mozilla on the release! Odd title though for this post, for where is the "everyone"? The link shows comparisons to previous versions of Firefox, not other browsers. One thing I hope they fix before final release though is the constant CPU usage when you have many tabs open. I thought the Panorama feature was supposed to address this. It's currently idling at around 25% CPU for me, and no, unfortunately I can't blame it on Flash. :-\

jmillikin 16y ago
> Odd title though for this post, for where is the "everyone"? The link shows comparisons to previous versions of Firefox, not other browsers. http://arewefastyet.com/ http://arewefastyet.com/ Sunspider’s not a very good benchmark; more interesting to me is that they’re nearly even with V8 in V8’s own benchmark. Though I wonder why they can’t backport TM, or at least a subset, to 3.6; is Firefox so monolithic that improvements to the scripthost can’t be separated from the rest of the browser?
- kylemathews 16y ago
  I ran the tests on my Ubuntu 10.10 laptop running Firefox-4.0 Beta8pre and Chrome 9.0.570.0 (64571) and Firefox actually beat Chrome 2943 to 3645 (or a 23% improvement) averaged over two runs. Gotta love browser competition!
  - baq 16y ago
    don't ever average software benchmarks, it doesn't make sense. always take the best run.
- ianb 16y ago
  Huh... I haven't heard anyone in the Mozilla world even talk about backporting to 3.6 (even to say it's a bad idea). Everyone is very focused on 4.
- instcode 16y ago
  I'm very happy with the result. However, on some javascript intensive webpages, such as https://console.aws.amazon.com/s3/home https://console.aws.amazon.com/s3/home, it hangs the whole Firefox for a little while. Hopefully with a long timeline to the release, no such issues remained.
- dochtman 16y ago
  Err, your last sentence is a bit weird. First of all, 3.6 already has TraceMonkey; what's new in Fx 4 is JägerMonkey, and the integration between it and TM. Second, the Mozilla JS engine is largely developed separately (all of the actual development these days is in a separate repository, which merges semi-regularly with the main mozilla-central repo), but have you seen any other browser backporting anything other than security fixes?
SkyMarshal 16y ago
>It's currently idling at around 25% CPU for me, and no, unfortunately I can't blame it on Flash. :-\ I sometimes notice this too, but always after running a bunch of Flash vids. Haven't methodically tested it, since it's not a priority and a quick restart fixes it. But how do you know it's not Flash?
- sp332 16y ago
  Flash runs in its own process named "plugin-container", so if Flash crashes it won't take down the rest of the browser. I'm pretty sure that if flash were eating CPU, it would be attributed to the "plugin-container" process and not the "firefox" process.

jmillikin 16y ago

> Odd title though for this post, for where is the "everyone"? The link shows comparisons to previous versions of Firefox, not other browsers. http://arewefastyet.com/ http://arewefastyet.com/ Sunspider’s not a very good benchmark; more interesting to me is that they’re nearly even with V8 in V8’s own benchmark. Though I wonder why they can’t backport TM, or at least a subset, to 3.6; is Firefox so monolithic that improvements to the scripthost can’t be separated from the rest of the browser?

kylemathews 16y ago
I ran the tests on my Ubuntu 10.10 laptop running Firefox-4.0 Beta8pre and Chrome 9.0.570.0 (64571) and Firefox actually beat Chrome 2943 to 3645 (or a 23% improvement) averaged over two runs. Gotta love browser competition!
- baq 16y ago
  don't ever average software benchmarks, it doesn't make sense. always take the best run.
ianb 16y ago
Huh... I haven't heard anyone in the Mozilla world even talk about backporting to 3.6 (even to say it's a bad idea). Everyone is very focused on 4.
instcode 16y ago
I'm very happy with the result. However, on some javascript intensive webpages, such as https://console.aws.amazon.com/s3/home https://console.aws.amazon.com/s3/home, it hangs the whole Firefox for a little while. Hopefully with a long timeline to the release, no such issues remained.
dochtman 16y ago
Err, your last sentence is a bit weird. First of all, 3.6 already has TraceMonkey; what's new in Fx 4 is JägerMonkey, and the integration between it and TM. Second, the Mozilla JS engine is largely developed separately (all of the actual development these days is in a separate repository, which merges semi-regularly with the main mozilla-central repo), but have you seen any other browser backporting anything other than security fixes?

SkyMarshal 16y ago

>It's currently idling at around 25% CPU for me, and no, unfortunately I can't blame it on Flash. :-\ I sometimes notice this too, but always after running a bunch of Flash vids. Haven't methodically tested it, since it's not a priority and a quick restart fixes it. But how do you know it's not Flash?

sp332 16y ago
Flash runs in its own process named "plugin-container", so if Flash crashes it won't take down the rest of the browser. I'm pretty sure that if flash were eating CPU, it would be attributed to the "plugin-container" process and not the "firefox" process.