From 45cd4e8b20b6f71372745e1c5099c1bab72df133 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Raymond Hill Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 19:46:05 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] =?UTF-8?q?Updated=20=C2=B5Block=20vs.=20ABP:=20efficiency?= =?UTF-8?q?=20compared=20(markdown)?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --- µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md | 14 +++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md b/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md index 57549ae..ceb055d 100644 --- a/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md +++ b/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md @@ -26,4 +26,16 @@ Below are the average time it takes for each extension to handle a net request i Fun fact: µBlock will actually execute more efficiently if you enable _ hpHosts’s Ad and tracking servers_, the timing of `chrome.webRequest.onBeforeRequest` goes below 185 ms when this list is enabled. The key is that filters made of plain hostnames are processed in a very efficient way in µBlock. -### Added memory footprint to web pages \ No newline at end of file +### Added memory footprint to web pages + +Extensions have their own memory footprint, but they also causes increased memory footprint in web pages. Below you can see the added memory footprint in a very simple web page, [Hacker News](https://news.ycombinator.com/). First screenshot is when no extension at all is used, so it's consider it is the reference memory footprint, other screenshots show the new memory footprint caused by each extension. + +##### No extension +![No extension](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/hn-alone.png) + +##### Adblock Plus +![ABP](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/hn-abp.png) + +##### µBlock +![uBlock](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/hn-ublock.png) +