Forum Groups
  All forums
    Help & Feedback
      Work in progress
      Finished Art
      Non-Max related

Featured Threads
  inspiration alert!!!
(36 replies)
  Indespensible MaxScripts, Plugins and 3rd Party Tools
(37 replies)
  The allmighty FREE Resources Thread !
(17 replies)
  spam alert!!!
(4886 replies)
  Maxforums member photo gallery index
(114 replies)
  Maxforums Member Tutorials
(89 replies)
  three cheers to maxforums...
(240 replies)
  101 Things you didnt know in Max...
(198 replies)
  A Face tutorial from MDB101 :D
(95 replies) Members Gallery
(516 replies)
(637 replies)
  Dub's Maxscript Tutorial Index
(119 replies)

Maxunderground news unavailable

First page  Go to the previous page   [01]  [02]  [03]  Go to the next page  Last page
Processes - Chrome.exe
show user profile  ScotlandDave
It bugs the crap out of me ( as i`m often maxing out even with 24Gb ram ( still haven`t sorted the issue out as i actually have 32Gb in there ) ) that Chrome runs multiple chrome.exe processes in task manager ( Win7 64bit here )..

For example at the moment i have eight tabs open, and there`s 16 or 17 instances of chrome.exe, ranging from 1 Mb right up to 170 Mb`s..

Anybody else noticed this? Does it seem reasonable for a browser to be sucking up 700Mb`s of RAM?

I have a web ftp java uploader running in one tab, and the bf3 browser is opened most of the time in the background, but apart from those it`s just ordinary browsing..

Website | Blog | Contact | Vimeo

read 784 times
9/10/2012 10:37:10 PM (last edit: 9/10/2012 10:37:10 PM)
show user profile  Weetabix
It does this because each part of the browser is sandboxed, which protects against crashes, system instability, and apparently security.

I've just got this page open, and I've got six Chrome processes. However, it's using less, about 200megs of memory.

read 784 times
9/10/2012 10:40:13 PM (last edit: 9/10/2012 10:40:13 PM)
show user profile  ScotlandDave
Yep the modularity makes sense, although i`ve found it no more secure and generally crashes altogether as opposed to only a single tab, with the exception of flash which doesn`t take the browser down with it.. Occasionally i`m still signed into hotmail after a crash ( which is new never happened in the past )..

But regards the memory usage, i suppose it might just be caching for speed of access etc, but could be more proactive on garbage collection even if so..

Website | Blog | Contact | Vimeo

read 777 times
9/10/2012 10:47:13 PM (last edit: 9/10/2012 10:47:13 PM)
show user profile  LionDebt
I've always had this problem too - but it never maxes out my RAM... I often have upwards of 20 tabs open and notice there are ~10 to ~15 chrome processes if not more. I always put it down to chrome just being a bit of a memory eating whore. I have a readability plugin, a skype plugin and the usual acrobat reader/flash/shockwave plugins installed.

I only have 8GB of RAM in my pc at the minute, but I always close chrome entirely if I'm going to start doing anything else processor/memory heavy. Which is a bit annoying to have to do, since it's a fecking browser.
read 772 times
9/10/2012 11:32:24 PM (last edit: 9/10/2012 11:32:24 PM)
show user profile  Sir_Manfred
My Firefox currently uses 547 MB of ram. Sometimes more.
The more tabs I have open, the more memory it uses. If I've had the browser running for a long time it could use over 1 GiggityByte.

Visit my Portfolio

read 769 times
9/10/2012 11:34:34 PM (last edit: 9/10/2012 11:34:34 PM)
show user profile  Weetabix
I gave up on Firefox. Although it has the best extensions, it has got worse and worse over the years, and became an unusable mess for me. It's a shame. I've been using it since it originally branched, and was called Phoenix.

I now use only Chrome. I have a few issues with it, but it's stable and fast, although it does hog memory a little.

read 764 times
9/10/2012 11:52:17 PM (last edit: 9/10/2012 11:52:17 PM)
show user profile  ScotlandDave
I`m not talking about it using ALL my memory, but as i said around 700 megazoids at the moment..

Manfred that was the reason i ditched Firefox as it`d really started to slow down a lot with later releases and found chrome to be really transparent, with lots of screen space.

Website | Blog | Contact | Vimeo

read 763 times
9/10/2012 11:53:02 PM (last edit: 9/10/2012 11:53:02 PM)
show user profile  LionDebt
Yeah I jumped from FF to Chrome pretty much as soon as Chrome came out.. it's still the no-brainer, best browsing doohicky you can use. Internet Exploder is a redundant piece of trash, what more does one expect from Microsoft though... Firefox was the bee's knee's and the only real alternative to IE for a little while, and it's only initial competition (if I Remember correctly which I probably don't) was Opera. Bit disappointing that FF has gone downhill so rapidly over the years.
read 749 times
9/11/2012 12:52:51 AM (last edit: 9/11/2012 12:52:51 AM)
show user profile  Mr_Stabby
well right now i got 6 tabs open on opera and it says 224MB, when im elbow deep in some research with 100+ tabs i do remember it registering at over 2gb ram at times though.. not that i mind.

these days i dont really recommend opera anymore though, the other browsers have caught up and passed it in speed and lately its got all them annoying little incompatibilities (probably because opera userbase is rather tiny and big sites dont consider working on opera all that important). Like every new version there is a little bug on some site fixed and a new one comes along somewhere else, for example right now youtube's video seek bar jumps up and down like nuts when you try to fiddle with it full screen, before that flash videos would stop loading new data when full screen, etc (yeah so mostly to do with flash but sometimes with js and html5 too). The only reason i still use it is because im just so used to the way it "moves" if that makes any sense.

read 727 times
9/11/2012 3:23:38 AM (last edit: 9/11/2012 3:32:02 AM)
show user profile  advance-software
ummm .. ff has been getting much better.

what does chrome currently do better than ff ?

(bang up to date - ff 16 beta vs chrome canary)

lots of tabs = lots of images, which are all rgb or sometimes rgba = lots of memory used.

don't open loads of image heavy tabs if you're running low on memory.

re: it's just a browser.

it's a hardware accelerated real-time graphics app. like the max viewport. or quake. or unreal. there's no 'just' about it. that a browser "just works" leads many to think the tech is simple. it isn't, it's just the complexity is hidden. all modern browsers are fairly advanced pieces of technology. good design isn't noticed, etc.
read 713 times
9/11/2012 9:01:14 AM (last edit: 9/11/2012 9:27:09 AM)
show user profile  Weetabix
>>ummm .. ff has been getting much better.

Ha ha ha, no. I was the biggest proponent of FF for many years, but on every machine I have, it has got worse and worse, slower and crashier over the years. I've often got several windows open, video streaming in one, working in another. FF doesn't cut the mustard any more. Chrome is superior, but FF does have the edge on customization and extension.

At the end of the day, I use what I want and you use what you want. I won't try to force my decisions on to you.

read 691 times
9/11/2012 9:38:29 AM (last edit: 9/11/2012 9:38:29 AM)
show user profile  advance-software
that's not a specific I can relay to the ff dev team for consideration.

ff 16b2 doesn't crash for me.

the only issue I have with it is lack of h264 video support - which is actually quite a biggie.

ff has a more advanced plugin architecture now which will hopefully be adopted by chrome etc. at some stage. it's a bit techy but does away with plugins rendering into seperate overlaid windows & lets them render directly into compositing textures. don't think anyone's using it yet, but it's there.

not about forcing decisions, it's just analysis. (from my perspective anyhow - I care because our tech interfaces to gecko which is the ff html rendering engine). could do something similar with chromium but don't currently see the need & ff has a more advanced plugin architecture which we require to handle page plugins efficiently.
read 688 times
9/11/2012 9:44:53 AM (last edit: 9/11/2012 9:52:52 AM)
show user profile  Weetabix
Fair enough.

FF does indeed have a better plugin system, and does seem to have much more available then Chrome does. There are things I hate in Chrome that FF did better.

Does FF still leak memory constantly? The last year I had of using FF was painful. I even had to stop recommending it to family and friends. This was on several computers, all had the same problems with it. Memory leaks, lockups when streaming video. It broke my heart to leave it, but I had to.

read 676 times
9/11/2012 9:53:34 AM (last edit: 9/11/2012 9:53:34 AM)
show user profile  advance-software
don't know for certain as I'm not looking at that right now but a quick google indicates some issues were addressed in the current production version (15).

new in 16 should be webrtc which is fairly exciting.

already present in chrome. so that + webgl = mmorpg in ur browsa.
read 670 times
9/11/2012 9:59:50 AM (last edit: 9/11/2012 10:02:17 AM)
show user profile  ScotlandDave
Interesting Weetabix, i can see how you`re attempting to stay calm in the face of repeated rebuttals from a die hard software loyalist ( this is a forums dedicated to 3ds max there are no shortage of those ).. :)

I`m not sure what the core memory footprint is of both Chrome and FF respectively, but as has been said, it became increasingly obvious that FF was no longer doing what it once did so well ( i can JUST about remember telling everybody to use FF as it was brilliant ). So plugins architecture or not, nobody wants bloatware on their lightning fast Win7 system - it`s sooo windows XP.. Besides, Chrome has never had any glaring issues with plugins that i`ve heard of.

lots of tabs = lots of images, which are all rgb or sometimes rgba = lots of memory used.

don't open loads of image heavy tabs if you're running low on memory.

Thanks for stating the blindingly obvious as usual AS - if you actually read what`s been said you`ll see that there`s a concern Chrome might not be garbage collecting / cleaning up after itself as well as it might, regardless of browser usage..


that's not a specific I can relay to the ff dev team for consideration.

Why the need to be specific when an application broadly runs quite poorly? I`m fairly hard line in these circumstances, as i am in my regard for 3dsMax`s development and other apps that have went tits-up in the past, which is to say - the dev team can go fuck itself, useless twats..

Website | Blog | Contact | Vimeo

read 663 times
9/11/2012 10:05:52 AM (last edit: 9/11/2012 10:08:53 AM)
First page  Go to the previous page   [01]  [02]  [03]  Go to the next page  Last page
#Maxforums IRC
Open chat window