Not on my machine
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| montezuma Oct 08, 2009 7:24 PM EDT |
Not much difference in speed and lots of annoying bugs e.g bookmarks don't show up in the sidebar. Not recommended until later in the development cycle. |
| caitlyn Oct 08, 2009 8:03 PM EDT |
Every release of Firefox is touted as faster or thinner during the devlopment cycle. By t he final release it never seems to be true. |
| zenarcher Oct 08, 2009 8:38 PM EDT |
Just tried it here and I didn't see much speed improvement over Firefox 3.5 on my end, either. |
| tuxchick Oct 08, 2009 8:47 PM EDT |
How funny, I noticed that too. Every release is faster faster faster. By now it should be ahead in time. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 09, 2009 1:49 AM EDT |
The speed up the Javascript rendering, but everything else goes to %^& ... so on sites with a lot of Javascript, Firefox is better than ever ... but all that Flash out there takes its toll on performance. I wonder how they're doing on spreading the load over multiple cores ... |
| gus3 Oct 09, 2009 2:48 AM EDT |
@S_R: The devil's advocate view says the load is spread over multiple cores inherently, by putting the application on one core, and the X server on the other. (Experience says this does help.) |
| Sander_Marechal Oct 09, 2009 3:37 AM EDT |
Also, I am sure that firefox itself can run on one core while the javascript engine runs on another. That has been so since at least firefox 3.0. The difference in speed between 3.0 on a single core and a dual core machine is quite big on javascript-heavy sites. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!