prehistoric-systems/uBlock
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock.git synced 2026-03-11 09:04:36 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

More rewording

q1800 2022-04-09 09:51:08 -05:00
parent adb22f814a
commit 671687ffd4
1 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

4
uBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md

@ -95,9 +95,9 @@ Here is the benchmark comparing CPU usage in the background page when loading [s
![CPU benchmark](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/bgpage-cpu-si.comx10.png)
I measured CPU usage for content scripts, but any information was drowned in a sea of noise because the web page used for the benchmark is quite bloated. But the fact that ABP inserts 14,000+ CSS rules caused the CPU to use much more than uBO (2-3 to 1 ratio) when comparing content script CPU usage (again, above is background page CPU usage).
Note: I measured CPU usage for content scripts, but any information was drowned in a sea of noise because the web page used for the benchmark is quite bloated. But the fact that ABP inserts 14,000+ CSS rules caused the CPU to use much more than uBO (2-3 to 1 ratio) when comparing content script CPU usage (again, above is background page CPU usage).
Also, the amount of work uBO does in its content scripts is proportional to the complexity of a web page. Although uBO did much better CPU-wise than ABP in its content script for such a bloated website, that means it was a worst-case scenario for uBO, and yet it did its job of hiding elements between 2 and 3 times faster.
Also, the amount of work uBO does in its content scripts is proportional to the complexity of a web page. Although uBO did much better CPU-wise than ABP in its content script for such a bloated website, this was a worst-case scenario for uBO, and yet it did its job of hiding elements between 2 and 3 times faster.
### Related wiki pages