Opera 12.15 for Windows a memory hog
-
Deleted User last edited by
I delayed upgrading from 11.64 to 12.15 due to many complaints of excess RAM or CPU usage. But I bit the bullet when setting up my new Sony Vaio laptop (Core i5), and have found Opera 12.15 working just fine. I have 12G RAM, with Opera using just 1.1G for 16 tabs.
Another 2.5G RAM in use by Win7 & other apps, including Chrome, which is using about 300MB for 4 tabs. Opera has been open for about 24 hours. It might be as simple as a clean install on a new system, with latest Flash, etc.
Just for grins, I just opened Quicken, Excel, Powerpoint and Word to see how they consume the remaining RAM. RAM consumption only increased from 3.6 to 3.85 gigabytes. I still show 8.3G free RAM. (Paging file is disabled = 0 MB) Go figure~!
Thus far, I also have not experienced the runaway CPU cycles that were sometimes a problem with ver 11.64. I'm pretty sure that was a result of ill-behaving Flash panels in one or more tabs.
Sorry, but I cannot confirm any RAM or CPU problems with Opera 12 ... happy camper~!
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by Pesala:
AdBlock may well be the culprit — try disabling it, and see if the memory use goes down.
Have you tried this suggestion? Many of the reviews for the extension cite high memory usage and that was my experience as well. I uninstalled it and went in a different direction and have no issues with excessive memory consumption whatsoever.
-
rameshi1 last edited by
Well, only Adblock was installed as an add-on in my 32-bit Opera 12.15 which I uninstalled and it seems to have made hardly any difference. Now, with just one tab open, and having accessed few popular sites (GMail, Yahoo) in it for the past 15-20 minutes, noticed that Opera's memory usage jumped from 146 Mb when I just opened it, to 290 Mb now. Thankfully, Opera doesn't run a Bank, else customers would wonder where all their money disappears between morning and noon
-
victorxstc2 last edited by
feedback: I too have a similar problem in recent versions of Opera (this is why I came back here to check if there is a solution). I have installed no add-ons. I can tell that Facebook is a RAM killer for Opera. Other sites that accept Facebook comments as well immediately reduce Opera performance by taking up my PC's limited RAM (2 gigs). I had set Memory Cache to "Automatic" but now I have allocated 60 megs only (although no visible difference). Besides, I don't recommend using an old version (due to security issues in previous ones).
Gladly the "Opera restart" trick did reduce RAM usage back to about 200 megabytes.
These tweaks and this Firefox addon can also help in reducing RAM usage and improving the performance.
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by rameshi1:
Well, only Adblock was installed as an add-on in my 32-bit Opera 12.15 which I uninstalled and it seems to have made hardly any difference. Now, with just one tab open, and having accessed few popular sites (GMail, Yahoo) in it for the past 15-20 minutes, noticed that Opera's memory usage jumped from 146 Mb when I just opened it, to 290 Mb now. Thankfully, Opera doesn't run a Bank, else customers would wonder where all their money disappears between morning and noon
What money disappearing has to do with RAM usage?
It's long known Opera <= 12.x doesn't free up all the RAM used by pages after you close their tabs, and I think it allows it to restore closed tabs and reopen pages from that site faster than other browsers. But whatever, I don't baby sit the process manager while I'm using my PC.But hey, now Opera 15 is out this discussion is very outdated, specially in a time where PCs ship with 4 GB of RAM perhaps it's time to stop looking at the process manager anyway and start actually enjoying the web...?
My opera.exe never came close to 2 GB of RAM usage. I bet the slowdowns in pages have nothing to do with it and you're just talking about the dying Presto of 12.x.
Some cases related here aren't even realistic and seem to be related to plug-in usage... -
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by victorxstc2:
I can tell that Facebook is a RAM killer for Opera. Other sites that accept Facebook comments as well immediately reduce Opera performance by taking up my PC's limited RAM (2 gigs).
Facebook is a "hog", agreed. But it can be blocked.
-
victorxstc2 last edited by
Originally posted by j7n:
Originally posted by victorxstc2:
I can tell that Facebook is a RAM killer for Opera. Other sites that accept Facebook comments as well immediately reduce Opera performance by taking up my PC's limited RAM (2 gigs).
Facebook is a "hog", agreed. But it can be blocked[/url" target="_blank">http://my.opera.com/community/forums/search.dml?term=block+facebook&username=&exactusername=Y&mode=forum&datemodifier=newer&limitdate=180&disp=thread&submit=+Search+]blocked[/url].
Yes but most of the time, I am surfing it. So blocking is not so practical for me.
-----------------------------
Anyways, I tested my Opera performance (Windows XP SP3. I have 3 gigs of RAM [I was incorrect the previous time about 2 gigs]):
My pagefile (disk RAM emulator) is always disabled. My Opera's RAM cache is set at 60 megs. I closed all other programs except some necessary ones. The baseline RAM usage for Opera with about 10 original tabs was 210 megabytes, and the baseline for the whole system was about 500 megs.
I opened about 50 lolzbook.com websites. Each page of this site has some small memes and sometimes larger gif files, a Facebook commenting panel, and some flash ads. After opening about 50 tabs of lolzbook, I faced "Out of Virtual Memory" error and with opening some more tabs Opera crashed. So by opening 50 silly pages, about a huge amount of 2.5 gigabytes was wasted by Opera. This is just ridiculous as each page accounted for 50 megs of RAM, while the content of each page barley reached 1 or 2 megs.
Interestingly, when I re-opened the crashed Opera and all the previous pages were fully loaded, only 1.5 gigs of RAM were allocated (Opera was using about 1 gigabyte). This raises 2 questions: Is there a bug causing this? If Opera can handle the same set of tabs with 1 gigabyte, why it first used 2.5 gigs? Second question is that why Opera uses 800 megs (as the best option) to 2.3 gigs (as the first experience) for 50 silly meme sites? It should use about 200 megs top for such amount of tabs full of simple content, not 800 megs, not 2.5 gigs.
I think Opera should fix this. Or give the user some optimization options. For example, a user should be able to define performance mode. He/she should be able to choose between a super-fast but RAM WASTING Opera, but another super-fast and RAM-friendly Opera. I called both "super-fast" as I notice no difference between the current version (12.15) and the older versions in terms of loading speed. The older ones were better. They used to render Facebook or other heavy websites much smoother and faster, compared to this buggy version.
I am sure Opera guys would do something about this bug.
Thanks a lot.
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by victorxstc2:
I am sure Opera guys would do something about this bug.
You shouldn't expect this, Opera 12.x won't be developed further, you're already testing an outdated version. Opera 15 and up is the reality.
-
victorxstc2 last edited by
I didn't mean in Opera 12, but in future versions. It is strange that v 15 is rolled out. I relied on my automatic updater. It didn't install the new Opera. Lets download the newest one then!
-
A Former User last edited by
It's Chromium-based and lack many functionalities right now so they decided to not push through auto-update, but it installs alongside 12.x so don't worry.
-
victorxstc2 last edited by
Thanks rafael. However I worry Opera team discontinue the current franchise.
To Opera Guys:
Oh my goodness! It terribly sucks, whatever it is. Some years ago we asked for a Light-weight Opera (Opera Light) for users who are not enjoying an advanced product, but need something simple like Chrome. We suggested that to save the sophisticated Opera from the pressure of simple users requesting that here, asking Opera developers to create a Chrome-alike besides the routine version. If this version 15 is the light one, and Opera will produce a technology beast (e.g., a sophisticated version 15 (like the current 12x)) I would love to use the heavy version and enjoy watching Opera Light converting users of other browsers to Opera.
However, if the light version is going to be the final and the ONLY solution for all the Opera users, I would DEFINITELY leave it after about 10+ years of happily using Opera. It is no more Opera as we knew it and enjoyed it. It is only a piece of junk.
I have persuaded so many of my friends to use Opera. Now what do I have to say? A new Chrome called Opera is in market?! Besides, I always mocked chrome for being so silly and ridiculously inefficient. Now I see the best browser ever has fully copied the worst one! I use to rate Opera 100, Firefox 40, Chrome 20, IE 02. Now I would rate Opera about 20 on the same scale. Where is all those super-user tweaks?
I just pray to god it is an Opera Light version besides a natural sophisticated Opera (like the current 12.x) to be rolled out soon.... If it is, that would be perfect, and I am so grateful. Otherwise, I consider new Opera a big failure and disappointment.
Thanks for reading.
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by victorxstc2:
Originally posted by j7n:
Originally posted by victorxstc2:
I can tell that Facebook is a RAM killer for Opera. Other sites that accept Facebook comments as well immediately reduce Opera performance by taking up my PC's limited RAM (2 gigs).
Facebook is a "hog", agreed. But it can be blocked.
Yes but most of the time, I am surfing it. So blocking is not so practical for me.
One of my posts at the top of the search results list shows how to block Facebook integration on 3rd party websites, while keeping Facebook's own website fully functional. Facebook may have changed a little since I looked at it but I believe this would still block most of its widgets and buttons.
I opened about 50 lolzbook.com websites. Each page of this site has some small memes and sometimes larger gif files, a Facebook commenting panel, and some flash ads.
That is what AdBlock or UrlFilter are for.
Lolz Book has to be put on diet immediately. This urlfilter will remove Facebook widgets from all sites, all the other widgets present on Lolz Book, except the lines above each picture (po.st), block all tracking services and graphical ads, and restore the ability to right-click on the page to copy or save text and graphics.
Opera using 333 MB of RAM with 50 pages of Lolz Book open; this time showing just the silly memes without ads and widgets.Second question is that why Opera uses 800 megs (as the best option) to 2.3 gigs (as the first experience) for 50 silly meme sites? It should use about 200 megs top for such amount of tabs full of simple content, not 800 megs, not 2.5 gigs.
The site loads a considerable amount of ads, tracking java script, and "social" widgets.
However, if the light version is going to be the final and the ONLY solution for all the Opera users, I would DEFINITELY leave it after about 10+ years of happily using Opera. It is no more Opera as we knew it and enjoyed it. It is only a piece of junk.
The new browser most certainly is a piece of junk. xD It is heavier than the feature rich Opera. And most importantly, it does not have urlfilter to take control over websites like Lolz Book. I wish they could add an "expert mode" switch to hide advanced controls for users who don't opt in to seeing them.
-
victorxstc2 last edited by
I see Opera 15 has even copied multiprocess approach of Chrome. It looks so pathetic. I am sorry to say this, but I thing Opera guys need negative feedbacks too.
It also occupies 10 to 60 megs of RAM per different tabs which might need only 1 to 3 megs RAM. TERRIBLE.
-
spartaa last edited by
put this start up command
--disable-gpu --in-process-gpu
it will decrease RAM usage, with cost Decrease Perfomance.
-
victorxstc2 last edited by
j7n, I appreciate your nice comment.
I have forgotten how to quote within quote, so my response would not be as neat as yours.
About disabling Facebook integration without disabling Facebook itself, thanks a lot. That is awesome.
About the ad filter and url filter, thanks a lot again. I am aware these are in part caused by ads, but I believe the used RAM is actually wasted somewhere else (poor coding, etc.). If each page of LolzBook really contained around 50 megs of information to occupy RAM, my internet connection was dead by now. I pay for my bandwidth per the used gigabytes. 50 pages, each with 50 megs of information would eat up all my connection and I had to pay and re-new it! So although disabling some features and blocking the ads would definitely help, these are not the culprits. As an addition to your solution, I even use my Opera in the "Cached Images" mode to prevent an image to load twice from the server (less bandwidth usage, better speed, less RAM). So I agree with you in reducing the bloated content of the websites.
But I think about 95% of the RAM used for each tab of Lolz Book is a waste of RAM, due to code issues. (kind of bug actually).
It is interesting that you loaded the same amount of tabs with only 300 megs of RAM. It is shocking! However, I think the ads are not consuming RAM. How Opera deals with those ads is the culprit. Each ad might need 500 K or 1 meg, not 20 or 30 megs.
And yes I would definitely use all your advice. Thanks.
About the piece of junk and your suggestion on Expert Mode, I fully agree. However, another idea was to release two different versions. One simple (Light Opera) which used less resources and was easy for non-tech people and also for netbooks, and the other one was heavy. Making a single software having both looks and both behaviors, itself, might bloat the software. But anyways, I would hug any solution other than this!
Besides as you said this new version is not even "light"!
-
victorxstc2 last edited by
Originally posted by spartaa:
put this start up command
--disable-gpu --in-process-gpu
it will decrease RAM usage, with cost Decrease Perfomance.
Thanks a lot. I will use it.
-
Deleted User last edited by
The 50 pages generated about 80 MB of downstream traffic for me. When reloading a page with Dragonfly open, it reported that most JavaScript was reloaded from cache. Still the state of each script on each page is different: different ads received from keywords present on each page, different count of shares for each picture on social media. You could also download a browser, install it five times, and display different content in each of the five. The browser would have been downloaded only once.
I reloaded the same 50 pages again in three browsers:
Opera 11.64 with ads: 1300 MB of RAM, load time 90s, peak usage about 1500 MB.
Opera 11.64 without ads: 347 MB of RAM, load time 33s.
Opium 15 --disable-gpu no blocking: around 1860 MB of RAM, if Commit Charge is compared, didn't measure loading time.Here is one meme from Lolz Book, saved using the excellent Opera browser:
-
victorxstc2 last edited by
j7n that was one very comprehensive feedback to the Opera team. I loved the Opium term (literally laughed).
-
acryion last edited by
Originally posted by Pesala:
300 Mbytes out of 4000 is about 13%
Lol at that math. 300 is not even 10%.
-
mkivtt last edited by
http://postimg.org/image/sgezevcc9/
11 tabs open. 1.7 GB memory used.
How ridiculous is this?
Sure, I can shut down Opera and wait 3-4 minutes (!) for the process to finally finish and restart it. Memory used will then be a few hundred MB. A few hours later it'll be right back up at 1.5+ GB. Opera slows down to an absolute crawl where it's almost unusable.
No matter what version I use (currently 12.15), I have always had this problem. And my PC is CLEAN... I'm actually a software engineer myself. How they do a job this bad is beyond me.
