From dd72020797456886e8da95bc6f2f0d0ed15893f8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Raymond Hill Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 17:29:29 -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 | 10 +++++++++- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md b/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md index 8737165..af47209 100644 --- a/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md +++ b/µBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared.md @@ -1,5 +1,9 @@ Here is a quick illustrated comparison of efficiency using various angles. Each extension were tested alone, as the only extension present. Benchmarking was performed with Chromium on Linux Mint 64-bit. +- [Own memory footprint](#own-memory-footprint) +- [Added overhead to each net request](#added-overhead-to-each-net-request) +- [Added memory footprint to web pages](#added-memory-footprint-to-web-pages) + ### Own memory footprint These screenshots show the memory footprint of ABP and µBlock _after_ they have gone through this rather [demanding benchmark](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Reference-benchmark). Once the benchmark was completed, I forced the browser to garbage collect the memory in each extension by clicking the trash icon (in dev console) a couple of times -- this is an _important step_, or else the shown memory footprint is not too reliable. @@ -60,7 +64,11 @@ Extensions have their own memory footprint, but they also causes increased memor ##### µBlock ![uBlock](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/hn-ublock.png) -Now keep in mind this is the added footprint for a very simple web page which has no embedded frames. You can multiply the added footprint on the main page by the number of frames embedded on a page, so page with frames can end up consuming a _lot_ more memory than they would have otherwise. A good stress test which demonstrate this is the [infamous vim test](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Adblock-Plus-memory-consumption). +Now keep in mind this is the added footprint for a very simple web page which has no embedded frames. You can multiply the added footprint on the main page by the number of frames embedded on a page, so page with frames can end up consuming a _lot_ more memory than they would have otherwise. For instance, a very simple web page with a couple of `iframe` in it, [The Acid3 Test](http://acid3.acidtests.org/): + +![uBlock](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/acid3test-mem.png) + +A good stress test which further demonstrate this is the [infamous vim test](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Adblock-Plus-memory-consumption). ##### µBlock vs. Adblock: memory usage differential during reference benchmark