I'm using iFreeMem and Safari uses EVERYTHING it can. Yeah, it gives it back when it's closed, but it hogs everything while it's working. Chrome does not do this.
That isn’t a memory leak, that is a an app designed to use as much as it needs if it’s available to speed up caching. OPen up more apps and Safari will give back RAM for them. It’s only taking what it can when it’s available and needed. More apps should RAM this intelligently and not limit itself when it doesn’t need to.
That isn?t a memory leak, that is a an app designed to use as much as is available to speed up caching. OPen up more apps and Safari will give back RAM for them. It?s only taking what it can when it?s available. More apps should RAM this intelligently and not limit itself when it doesn?t need to.
I would disagree even with that. I have 8 GB of ram. Safari is using 200 MB. It uses what it uses. No more, no less.
I would disagree even with that. I have 8 GB of ram. Safari is using 200 MB. It uses what it uses. No more, no less.
I was coming back to edit. I realized that it wouldn?t be read correctly. I didn?t mean to imply that it would just all the RAM you had, but that it would use all the RAM you have available if it needed it.
I?m at 122MB with two tabs opened, but when I did some hefty searches in my history I got a bump up to 340MB momentarily with an average around 240MB.
I was coming back to edit. I realized that it wouldn?t be read correctly. I didn?t mean to imply that it would just all the RAM you had, but that it would use all the RAM you have available if it needed it.
I?m at 122MB with two tabs opened, but when I did some hefty searches in my history I got a bump up to 340MB momentarily with an average around 240MB.
Yeah. It seems to use 2-10 MB per tab for me, with a single tab (basically just the browser opened to a page) at somewhere around 200. About on par with IE from what I recall. I should also check firefox. I don't think that's all that unusual these days
Yeah. It seems to use 2-10 MB per tab for me, with a single tab (basically just the browser opened to a page) at somewhere around 200. About on par with IE from what I recall. I should also check firefox. I don't think that's all that unusual these days
I think it was AnandTech that did tests on browser power usage while on battery under different loads. Safari and IE on Mac OS X and Windows, respectively, were the best. I?d like to see how Chrome fares now that it?s out. A downfall for Chrome is that the WebKit.framework seems to be quite efficient but on the upside, if yo are testing 64-bot Safari to 32-bit Chrome this may be in Chrome?s favour as 32-bit mode Safari was much more efficient when using Flash, likely so to Flash for Mac OS X not being 64-bit compatible yet even though it is run separately from the browser.
I have no interest in writing a script and being without my machine for periods of 7 hours so I?ll let someone else go for it, but I?d thought I?d throw it out there for some intrepid techs.
Considering even the base Mac's come with what, 2 GB, I don't see this as an issue.
Some people complain that even the cheap $400 notebooks come with more RAM than Macs but this test shows that they actually need more RAM due to crapware. The site below did a 9 different PC vendors pre-installed crapware and how it affected the preformance. Note that since removing the iWork MS Office for Mac trials over a year ago there is not even trialware on any Mac, much less pay-for-play crapware.
"The Apple had a lower memory footprint than its rivals, too. Of the 2GB of RAM installed, only 289MB was used when the machine was idling – around 14% of the total memory installed.”
So what if Safari or Chrome is faster? What, one uses WebKit and the other uses, uh, WebKit.
"OMG Google Chrome is so much better take that apple!"
Why not take Epiphany for a spin to see how it uses WebKit as well? Oh my, it was 0.045% slower than Safari! OMG
This test wasn?t with WebKit but with the JS engines each browser uses. Safari and default builds of WebKit use the Nitro JS engine while Google decided to go with their own V8 JS engine for Chrome.
That still doesn't make it a memory leak. I'm running safari right now with 4 tabs open. It's using 205 MB.
Hardly "everything".
Leave it up for awhile. I guess YMMV, but on my iMac (2008 model using 4Gigs of memory running Leopard), it does indeed take everything but a sliver along with everything else I have running. Once again, Chrome does not do this. Quitting Safari eliminates the problem and running Chrome doesn't duplicate it. Doesn't that sort of limit it to Safari?
What does the 'world leak' message mean? I apologize if I used the term wrong, but it hardly detracts from my issues with Safari, does it?
So, once again -'Oops, my bad' - now do you want to address the actual issues I have with Safari leaving very little memory free?
Just launched all 4 browsers with a fresh new session.
Chrome and Chromium came in at 40 MB.
Firefox came in at 116 MB
Safari came in at 80 MB
Considering even the base Mac's come with what, 2 GB, I don't see this as an issue.
I use multiple, multiple tabs. Often up to 12-16 at a time. With that many on Chrome, no problem. I still have about a quarter of my total memory 'free'. Using Safari, I can open all those tabs and it slowly creeps up to leaving nothing free and much 'inactive' but not 'free'. When I Optimize with iFreeMem, it gives them back, but I really shouldn't have to do that.
And with Chrome, I don't. I'm not saying Chrome doesn't have its issues, it does - but speed and memory usage aren't among them.
Leave it up for awhile. I guess YMMV, but on my iMac (2008 model using 4Gigs of memory running Leopard), it does indeed take everything but a sliver along with everything else I have running. Once again, Chrome does not do this. Quitting Safari eliminates the problem and running Chrome doesn't duplicate it. Doesn't that sort of limit it to Safari?
What does the 'world leak' message mean? I apologize if I used the term wrong, but it hardly detracts from my issues with Safari, does it?
So, once again -'Oops, my bad' - now do you want to address the actual issues I have with Safari leaving very little memory free?
Try this. Open up Safari then close the window, not the app, and check how much RAM Safari is using. Then use Chrome as you normally would and periodically check to see how much RAM Safari is using. If it keeps increasing in size when you look at it, yet haven?t used it, then it?s leaking memory.
Try this. Open up Safari then close the window, not the app, and check how much RAM Safari is using. Then use Chrome as you normally would and periodically check to see how much RAM Safari is using. If it keeps increasing in size when you look at it, yet haven?t used it, then it?s leaking memory.
You're probably right - I probably misused that term. All I know is that with similar amounts of tabs and windows open, Chrome eats less memory and doesn't give me the spinning beachballs that Safari does. The same kinds of use.
I have had other errors with Chrome, but they aren't as predictable.
So I'm not really concerned about whether it's a memory leak or not, I just know that after having it up for a while and using multiple tabs and windows (and then closing some windows)..after a while, my memory is completely 'eaten'. And it doesn't happen with Chrome.
The other thing I've gotten used to in Chrome is that searches are done right in the address bar - so you can either type a full address or if you're looking for something, you can just type that and it just brings you right to the same google page that the search window would. Now that I've been using it, why DO we have two fields at all? Isn't this a function of when IE had all that junkware 'Search Window' 'Yahoo Bar' etc that EVERYTHING wanted to load up in Windows? (I don't know if it's still like that, I've only used Windows intermittently since switching to Mac in 2002).
You're probably right - I probably misused that term. All I know is that with similar amounts of tabs and windows open, Chrome eats less memory and doesn't give me the spinning beachballs that Safari does. The same kinds of use.
I have had other errors with Chrome, but they aren't as predictable.
So I'm not really concerned about whether it's a memory leak or not, I just know that after having it up for a while and using multiple tabs and windows (and then closing some windows)..after a while, my memory is completely 'eaten'. And it doesn't happen with Chrome.
The other thing I've gotten used to in Chrome is that searches are done right in the address bar - so you can either type a full address or if you're looking for something, you can just type that and it just brings you right to the same google page that the search window would. Now that I've been using it, why DO we have two fields at all? Isn't this a function of when IE had all that junkware 'Search Window' 'Yahoo Bar' etc that EVERYTHING wanted to load up in Windows? (I don't know if it's still like that, I've only used Windows intermittently since switching to Mac in 2002).
I completely agree with you. Safari uses a TON of memory on my macbook, sometimes up to I Gb of RAM or more for apparently no reason. Right now I have 4 tabs open and none of them have flash movies or anything too draining. - in fact I have ClickToFlash installed - and Safari is using 566MB. Every couple of hours my RAM gets almost totally used up so I restart Safari, which gives me back a considerable chunk of memory. I use iStat menu btw.
@nondual: Glims is a great little utility for Safari that will allow you to search from the menubar. It also enables kiosk mode and a whole bunch of other nifty features.
Also, I wouldn't be too concerned about inactive memory. Maybe someone here can correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that it is really more "free" than "used." Rather, it is memory that has been used, but continues to be reserved for active applications but may be taken by any application that needs it. From Apple Support:
Inactive memory
This information has not recently been used but will remain in RAM until another application needs more memory but no free memory is available. If called upon by a process, this is quickly changed to Active memory; if it has been swapped to the hard disk, it will be moved back to RAM and marked as Active.
I think that whilst speed is of course important, there is more to a browser than how fast it is. Bookmark management, granularity of ad blocking, site preferences, tab presentation and other useful features are just as relevant in my view.
I think nobody cares about page rendering speed, as long you do not have to wait behind your screen.
When they say that the icon does not have the time to jump on the dock, Google people meant that their application launches very fast and is very responsive.
And I must admin Safari is a big piece of memory hungry software. I especially hate the "top site" tab, which can sometime take some minutes to appear on a busy systems (I had to deactivate it, even if it I like the idea), causing the whole Safari to stall. And I have a fast MacBookPro with 4Gb of RAM.
Firefox is always very responsive, and Gogle chrome is even better !
Comments
I'm using iFreeMem and Safari uses EVERYTHING it can. Yeah, it gives it back when it's closed, but it hogs everything while it's working. Chrome does not do this.
That isn’t a memory leak, that is a an app designed to use as much as it needs if it’s available to speed up caching. OPen up more apps and Safari will give back RAM for them. It’s only taking what it can when it’s available and needed. More apps should RAM this intelligently and not limit itself when it doesn’t need to.
That isn?t a memory leak, that is a an app designed to use as much as is available to speed up caching. OPen up more apps and Safari will give back RAM for them. It?s only taking what it can when it?s available. More apps should RAM this intelligently and not limit itself when it doesn?t need to.
I would disagree even with that. I have 8 GB of ram. Safari is using 200 MB. It uses what it uses. No more, no less.
I would disagree even with that. I have 8 GB of ram. Safari is using 200 MB. It uses what it uses. No more, no less.
I was coming back to edit. I realized that it wouldn?t be read correctly. I didn?t mean to imply that it would just all the RAM you had, but that it would use all the RAM you have available if it needed it.
I?m at 122MB with two tabs opened, but when I did some hefty searches in my history I got a bump up to 340MB momentarily with an average around 240MB.
I was coming back to edit. I realized that it wouldn?t be read correctly. I didn?t mean to imply that it would just all the RAM you had, but that it would use all the RAM you have available if it needed it.
I?m at 122MB with two tabs opened, but when I did some hefty searches in my history I got a bump up to 340MB momentarily with an average around 240MB.
Yeah. It seems to use 2-10 MB per tab for me, with a single tab (basically just the browser opened to a page) at somewhere around 200. About on par with IE from what I recall. I should also check firefox. I don't think that's all that unusual these days
Chrome and Chromium came in at 40 MB.
Firefox came in at 116 MB
Safari came in at 80 MB
Considering even the base Mac's come with what, 2 GB, I don't see this as an issue.
Yeah. It seems to use 2-10 MB per tab for me, with a single tab (basically just the browser opened to a page) at somewhere around 200. About on par with IE from what I recall. I should also check firefox. I don't think that's all that unusual these days
I think it was AnandTech that did tests on browser power usage while on battery under different loads. Safari and IE on Mac OS X and Windows, respectively, were the best. I?d like to see how Chrome fares now that it?s out. A downfall for Chrome is that the WebKit.framework seems to be quite efficient but on the upside, if yo are testing 64-bot Safari to 32-bit Chrome this may be in Chrome?s favour as 32-bit mode Safari was much more efficient when using Flash, likely so to Flash for Mac OS X not being 64-bit compatible yet even though it is run separately from the browser.
I have no interest in writing a script and being without my machine for periods of 7 hours so I?ll let someone else go for it, but I?d thought I?d throw it out there for some intrepid techs.
Considering even the base Mac's come with what, 2 GB, I don't see this as an issue.
Some people complain that even the cheap $400 notebooks come with more RAM than Macs but this test shows that they actually need more RAM due to crapware. The site below did a 9 different PC vendors pre-installed crapware and how it affected the preformance. Note that since removing the iWork MS Office for Mac trials over a year ago there is not even trialware on any Mac, much less pay-for-play crapware.
"OMG Google Chrome is so much better take that apple!"
Why not take Epiphany for a spin to see how it uses WebKit as well? Oh my, it was 0.045% slower than Safari! OMG
So what if Safari or Chrome is faster? What, one uses WebKit and the other uses, uh, WebKit.
"OMG Google Chrome is so much better take that apple!"
Why not take Epiphany for a spin to see how it uses WebKit as well? Oh my, it was 0.045% slower than Safari! OMG
This test wasn?t with WebKit but with the JS engines each browser uses. Safari and default builds of WebKit use the Nitro JS engine while Google decided to go with their own V8 JS engine for Chrome.
Why not take Epiphany for a spin to see how it uses WebKit as well? Oh my, it was 0.045% slower than Safari! OMG
Tell that to an Olympic skier.
That still doesn't make it a memory leak. I'm running safari right now with 4 tabs open. It's using 205 MB.
Hardly "everything".
Leave it up for awhile. I guess YMMV, but on my iMac (2008 model using 4Gigs of memory running Leopard), it does indeed take everything but a sliver along with everything else I have running. Once again, Chrome does not do this. Quitting Safari eliminates the problem and running Chrome doesn't duplicate it. Doesn't that sort of limit it to Safari?
What does the 'world leak' message mean? I apologize if I used the term wrong, but it hardly detracts from my issues with Safari, does it?
So, once again -'Oops, my bad' - now do you want to address the actual issues I have with Safari leaving very little memory free?
Just launched all 4 browsers with a fresh new session.
Chrome and Chromium came in at 40 MB.
Firefox came in at 116 MB
Safari came in at 80 MB
Considering even the base Mac's come with what, 2 GB, I don't see this as an issue.
I use multiple, multiple tabs. Often up to 12-16 at a time. With that many on Chrome, no problem. I still have about a quarter of my total memory 'free'. Using Safari, I can open all those tabs and it slowly creeps up to leaving nothing free and much 'inactive' but not 'free'. When I Optimize with iFreeMem, it gives them back, but I really shouldn't have to do that.
And with Chrome, I don't. I'm not saying Chrome doesn't have its issues, it does - but speed and memory usage aren't among them.
Leave it up for awhile. I guess YMMV, but on my iMac (2008 model using 4Gigs of memory running Leopard), it does indeed take everything but a sliver along with everything else I have running. Once again, Chrome does not do this. Quitting Safari eliminates the problem and running Chrome doesn't duplicate it. Doesn't that sort of limit it to Safari?
What does the 'world leak' message mean? I apologize if I used the term wrong, but it hardly detracts from my issues with Safari, does it?
So, once again -'Oops, my bad' - now do you want to address the actual issues I have with Safari leaving very little memory free?
Try this. Open up Safari then close the window, not the app, and check how much RAM Safari is using. Then use Chrome as you normally would and periodically check to see how much RAM Safari is using. If it keeps increasing in size when you look at it, yet haven?t used it, then it?s leaking memory.
Try this. Open up Safari then close the window, not the app, and check how much RAM Safari is using. Then use Chrome as you normally would and periodically check to see how much RAM Safari is using. If it keeps increasing in size when you look at it, yet haven?t used it, then it?s leaking memory.
You're probably right - I probably misused that term. All I know is that with similar amounts of tabs and windows open, Chrome eats less memory and doesn't give me the spinning beachballs that Safari does. The same kinds of use.
I have had other errors with Chrome, but they aren't as predictable.
So I'm not really concerned about whether it's a memory leak or not, I just know that after having it up for a while and using multiple tabs and windows (and then closing some windows)..after a while, my memory is completely 'eaten'. And it doesn't happen with Chrome.
The other thing I've gotten used to in Chrome is that searches are done right in the address bar - so you can either type a full address or if you're looking for something, you can just type that and it just brings you right to the same google page that the search window would. Now that I've been using it, why DO we have two fields at all? Isn't this a function of when IE had all that junkware 'Search Window' 'Yahoo Bar' etc that EVERYTHING wanted to load up in Windows? (I don't know if it's still like that, I've only used Windows intermittently since switching to Mac in 2002).
You're probably right - I probably misused that term. All I know is that with similar amounts of tabs and windows open, Chrome eats less memory and doesn't give me the spinning beachballs that Safari does. The same kinds of use.
I have had other errors with Chrome, but they aren't as predictable.
So I'm not really concerned about whether it's a memory leak or not, I just know that after having it up for a while and using multiple tabs and windows (and then closing some windows)..after a while, my memory is completely 'eaten'. And it doesn't happen with Chrome.
The other thing I've gotten used to in Chrome is that searches are done right in the address bar - so you can either type a full address or if you're looking for something, you can just type that and it just brings you right to the same google page that the search window would. Now that I've been using it, why DO we have two fields at all? Isn't this a function of when IE had all that junkware 'Search Window' 'Yahoo Bar' etc that EVERYTHING wanted to load up in Windows? (I don't know if it's still like that, I've only used Windows intermittently since switching to Mac in 2002).
I completely agree with you. Safari uses a TON of memory on my macbook, sometimes up to I Gb of RAM or more for apparently no reason. Right now I have 4 tabs open and none of them have flash movies or anything too draining. - in fact I have ClickToFlash installed - and Safari is using 566MB. Every couple of hours my RAM gets almost totally used up so I restart Safari, which gives me back a considerable chunk of memory. I use iStat menu btw.
Also, I wouldn't be too concerned about inactive memory. Maybe someone here can correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that it is really more "free" than "used." Rather, it is memory that has been used, but continues to be reserved for active applications but may be taken by any application that needs it. From Apple Support:
Inactive memory
This information has not recently been used but will remain in RAM until another application needs more memory but no free memory is available. If called upon by a process, this is quickly changed to Active memory; if it has been swapped to the hard disk, it will be moved back to RAM and marked as Active.
But, to look at other areas where people "feel" fast, I think Chrome has a clear edge over Safari.
For example, startup time is extremely fast with Chrome.
My 2 cents
Set google as the home page in Safari, I don't think you'll notice a difference in launch times.
Is this the inspiration for Chrome's icon????
When they say that the icon does not have the time to jump on the dock, Google people meant that their application launches very fast and is very responsive.
And I must admin Safari is a big piece of memory hungry software. I especially hate the "top site" tab, which can sometime take some minutes to appear on a busy systems (I had to deactivate it, even if it I like the idea), causing the whole Safari to stall. And I have a fast MacBookPro with 4Gb of RAM.
Firefox is always very responsive, and Gogle chrome is even better !