From 7ddfd8dcf4f9bf21a88f32778c95aa954c532401 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: SW1FT Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 19:58:16 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Updated Own memory usage: benchmarks over time (markdown) --- ...ime.md => Own-memory-usage:-benchmarks-over-time.md | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) rename Own memory usage: benchmarks over time.md => Own-memory-usage:-benchmarks-over-time.md (79%) diff --git a/Own memory usage: benchmarks over time.md b/Own-memory-usage:-benchmarks-over-time.md similarity index 79% rename from Own memory usage: benchmarks over time.md rename to Own-memory-usage:-benchmarks-over-time.md index 46b9228..e2c887d 100644 --- a/Own memory usage: benchmarks over time.md +++ b/Own-memory-usage:-benchmarks-over-time.md @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ Just a place for me to keep track of comparative memory usage over time. Screens ### 23 December 2014 - Chromium 39.0.2171.65 64-bit (Linux) -- µBlock 0.8.2.2 +- uBlock 0.8.2.2 - AdBlock 2.15 - Adblock Plus 1.8.8 - Adguard AdBlocker 1.0.3.8 @@ -15,10 +15,10 @@ After benchmark completed:
![after](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/benchmarks/mem-usage-20141223-after.png) Observations during benchmark: -- ABP/AdBlock/Adguard are CPU intensive. Whereas µBlock consistently show at most low-single digit CPU usage, other blockers are most often showing double-digit CPU usage, and sometimes in the high double-digit range. +- ABP/AdBlock/Adguard are CPU intensive. Whereas uBlock consistently show at most low-single digit CPU usage, other blockers are most often showing double-digit CPU usage, and sometimes in the high double-digit range. Settings: -- **µBlock 0.8.2.2**: _EasyList_, _EasyPrivacy_, _Peter Lowe's_, _Fanboy’s Social Blocking List‎_, all malware lists (3). Launched with a valid selfie (i.e. less memory churning at launch). +- **uBlock 0.8.2.2**: _EasyList_, _EasyPrivacy_, _Peter Lowe's_, _Fanboy’s Social Blocking List‎_, all malware lists (3). Launched with a valid selfie (i.e. less memory churning at launch). - **AdBlock 2.15**: _AdBlock custom filters_, _EasyList_, _EasyPrivacy_, _Peter Lowe's_, _Fanboy’s Social Blocking List‎_, _Malware protection_. - **Adblock Plus 1.8.5**: _EasyList_, _EasyPrivacy_, _Peter Lowe's_, _Fanboy’s Social Blocking List‎_, _Malware Domains_. _Acceptable ads_ disabled. - **Adguard AdBlocker 1.0.3.8**: _English filters_, _Spyware filter_, _Peter Lowe's_, _Social media filter‎_, _Phishing and malware protection_. _Allow acceptable ads_ disabled. @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ Notes: ### 18 September 2014 - Chromium 37.0.2062.94 64-bit (Linux) -- µBlock v 0.6.2.1 +- uBlock v 0.6.2.1 - AdBlock 2.7.13 - Adblock Plus 1.8.5 - Ghostery 5.4.0 @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ Observations during benchmark: - AdBlock is *very* CPU intensive. Adblock Plus also, although to a lesser degree compared to AdBlock. Settings: -- **µBlock v 0.6.2.1**: _EasyList_, _EasyPrivacy_, _Peter Lowe's_, _Fanboy’s Social Blocking List‎_, all malware lists (3). Launched with a valid selfie (i.e. less memory churning at launch). +- **uBlock v 0.6.2.1**: _EasyList_, _EasyPrivacy_, _Peter Lowe's_, _Fanboy’s Social Blocking List‎_, all malware lists (3). Launched with a valid selfie (i.e. less memory churning at launch). - **AdBlock 2.7.13**: _AdBlock custom filters_, _EasyList_, _EasyPrivacy_, _Fanboy’s Social Blocking List‎_, _Malware protection_. - **Adblock Plus 1.8.5**: _EasyList_, _EasyPrivacy_, _Fanboy’s Social Blocking List‎_, _Malware Domains_. _Acceptable ads_ disabled. - **Ghostery 5.4.0**: _Blocking all trackers_. Ghostrank not selected. _Alert bubble_ disabled.