General :: Web Browsers Running Much Slower, Compared With Windows 7, Same PC?
Jan 28, 2010
Debian lenny, old install (I've upgraded to lenny when it was just about to become the stable release), versus windows 7, fresh install.Comparing browsers speeds with numion.com/Stopwatch.html, I had results such as:Iceweasel (firefox) on linux: from 9.154 seconds to 21:860 seconds (the same webpage, reloaded)Firefox on windows: 4.32 seconds - and never much slower than thatThe fastest browser on linux was Opera, ranging from 8.562 to 5.503 secs to load the same page, but even internet explorer beat/match it with its timing of about five seconds.
I have not other browsers on windows; on linux there is aroraonqueror (KDE3), kazehakase, chrome, and dillo, besides text browsers. I didn't test on dillo; Kazehakase and chrome were the only ones which had nearly decent results, but still very bad, 11 to 13 seconds for chrome, and 21 for kazehakase. Konqueror just seemed to never finish to load the page, I gave up when it was still loading somethingfter nutes and 5 seconds.'ve emptied the cache every time I would test, and I was running almost only the browsers and not much else. Whatever comes by default on windows, and on linux, I was on openbox, with nothing much going on I guess, I think the most memory consuming processthe time, besides xorg and the browsers themselves, was dictd.
I've researched a little bit about, but not enough to make a list of possible things to change in order to improve the speed on linux. Most of the time there are people just agreeing that on windows the rendering is faster, and other people saying that with them is the opposite, with some minor variations like people saying that linux is faster for plain downloads while windows is faster for web browsing due to better graphics.
(by the way; I haven't installed any graphic card driver on windows, which is still running on 1024x768, while linux runs on 1280x1024, with the "nv" generic driver, without fancy options, not supported by my old card) The closest to a suggestion of possible solutions was someone saying tha compilation may affect performance, I guess it was both about kernel compilation, and the web browsers themselves.I'll google a bit more about how to "compile for speed", both kernels and programs (maybe the x server
Just read a post on this page (scroll down about half way) and it seems like all mozilla based browsers are still slower in linux vs wine and/or windows! [URL]...I thought after almost two years this would've been fixed (there's been earlier reports besides the link I gave above). Heck I thought it would be a problem with a specific version release and/or releases? I think this is a bit ridiculous after this long and I'm almost wondering if it's been around longer than 2 years when anyone even cared to take notice! Oh and did I already mention that compiling it doesn't make a difference? You probly knew that already. I'm running bleeding edge Gentoo with window maker (march=prescott sse sse2 sse3 mmx mmxext blah use flags and cflags) and Slackware 13.1 (alot of stuff compiled and/or recompiled from source-optimized with same flags as gentoo and even more flags (and less package features) when things are stable and ok. Yes compiling is pain on a overclocked Celeron D lol. Well not too painful
Thanks to google-chromium and/or chrome we don't have to worry about speed issues but come-on this is almost sick! Firefox windows via wine way faster than a native linux build? WTF... That's like almost embarrassing. Has anyone found anything to resolve this issue. Perhaps it's a simple yet overlooked setting that no one bothers with?
To that link above one of the posters mentioned it's the DNS cache setting that fixes the speed issue, but then others posted back saying it doesn't resolve this issue so obviously that's not the case. There's definately a flaw with the mozilla code under linux since even epiphany (which is very lightweight in comparison to regular firefox) suffers performance issues as well as others.
It's a bit upsetting I.M.O. (in my opinion! lolz) that this issue isn't resolved yet after all this time? I mean common. What about people who have no choice but to use Firefox. I have to use firefox by force when I play QuakeLive! (the plugin is not made for any other linux browser).
Even besides that point. Mozilla was made in the first place to be light weight, fast and secure vs internet explorer. It has severely changed since then (remember when it was the only tabbed browser available? It was sweet back then!). Now it just seems bloated and awful. Thankfully not terribly awful on Windows but compared to Google-Chrome (especially Safari which is MacOS only but still) it gets smoked in terms of speed, memory use and simplicity. At least not as bad as Internet Explorer (lol @ internet explorer. OMG the slowzyynessz and heeuuchggeneesszz).
So yeah being an open source browser and running terribly on an open source O.S. vs a closed source one. What's gonna' happen? Has this already been mentioned and fixed somewhere that I never looked or is it completely hopeless and just better not to use it for those of us that are bothered by it.
Im experiencing a strange problem with 10.04. When it first boots up its reasonably quick (as snappy as Gnome ever has been) but after its been running for a day or two it gets ununsably slow and has to be rebooted.
I dont see how it can be anything to do with my hardware as it runs OK when first started. Ive monitored RAM usage and it doesnt seem to differ much. There's always the same amount unused.
i recently purchased my second laptop, primarily for linux. When i chose it, my main concern was battery life. Just to make a side note. When i say battery life, i mean how long the computer takes until the battery goes flat. Not how many years/ect it takes till the battery will no longer hold charge.
My new computer claims to be able to get 10 hours. Although it's a bit off, i get a satisfying little bit over 6 hours, from full charge. This is running Windows 7. I couldn't wait to put Linux on my new computer, i have, but it just isn't satisfying because i only get about 4 hours while running linux, tried three different distros, and all roughly the same.
I've found myself using the -v flag for lots of applications less and less (especially for trivial stuff like tar and cp). However, when I did and I was, say, unzipping a large file, it would take longer than when I didn't use the -v flag.I assume this is because the terminal has to process the text and I'm filling up whatever buffer it might have. But my question is, does this make the application actually run slower or does it complete in the same amount of time and what I'm seeing is the terminal trying to catch up?
I have installed Wubi (Ubuntu 10.10) recently. It takes more time to boot than Windows. But my main concern is that my browsing speed is much slower compared to that on Windows 7. How can this be resolved?
using mint 10, now after updates my system is barely working. The programs were no longer showing in the task bar, and the system was running much slower.
This repeated over and over again. My temperature was never to high 40-55, and I found a suggestion to update my kernel to 2.6.37-020637. After doing so there is no longer the thermal limit exceeded error but the computer is still running poorly. The system is slow and again no programs are showing up in the task bar when open.
I have become a recent fan of linux and I want to install ubuntu on my acer aspire 5630 because vista runs terrible on it. Everything seems to work fine when I run it off the cd im just wondering if it will still work great when i actually install it. Is there any big difference between running the os off the cd compared to when you actually install it?
I have a big archive with about 10000 documents in a usb stick. What I have noticed is that browsing of that archive with gnome is much slower with ubuntu than winXP ( dual boot , same PC ) where it is almost instant.I have disabled assistive technologies and installed Thunar file browser. It improved things but again the lag is important. Linux is in general much faster than windows, so I wonder why is it happening ?
It used to have a lightening speed. But now every application is taking few seconds to start, even on Konsole, the commands take some seconds to get typed ! (I literally have to wait for cursor to move and commands to get typed on Konsole). Folders are taking some seconds to get opened !
I rebooted the computer but that proved to be useless.
Here the ps output:
Code: anisha@linux-uitj:~> pstree -Apuh `id -anisha` id: invalid option -- 'i' Try `id --help' for more information. init(1)-+-acpid(1054)
I am doing backups and restores to and from a backup server machine in the garage (in case of fire or theft) using rsync, and the LAN is running much slower than I think it should. Best consistent speed I get is 40Mb/s. The lights on the interface cards indicate it's in Gb mode, and the interfaces are fairly new. The router is a Netgear WNDR3700 the top-of-the-line consumer-grade router. Hardwire only, using Ubiquiti ToughCable and ToughConnectors, less than a 50' run.
I am comparing distros of Linux on a computer with VERY low specs. I have a CLI only version of Ubuntu 9.10 running A-OK, but when I run lwm or just X the video flickers (which I believe is due not to the video card/driver but to the resources used). I have tried this with two video cards with the same result.
When I run puppy it flies with no setup.
I know that Puppy is designed for older systems (2.4 Kernel and all that), but is there any other reason why Ubuntu would be slow in comparison.
I am using the nv driver with a Riva TNT PCI Video card.
The system's volume is way too low compared to windows vista set up on the same computer. The master volume (at the top right corner) and the player's volume is set to full and the speaker's volume is almost full. even the sound is just ok, not loud. Why can such a thing happen on fedora 10?
I am using linux fedora 13. Speed Internet is very low compared to Windows xp.I'm using ADSL. Especially when I'm using the FTP for download. my browser is firefox . my download manager is uget . I tested Almost all download manager . No difference.
first of all im new to OpenSuse i have been using different distros since early 90's if theres one i havent tried i would be very surprised anyway im very picky when it comes to sound and picture maybe its the fact that im a developer and also art director anyhoo i got tired of my HTPC ( windows ) i thought linux has to be able to do it just as well i mean i only use it for movies and music but was surprised to see how video works in linux picture is somewhat ok compared to Windows but movement is another story even vsync off it looks like a old VHS tape when it should be DVD. Cam-panning is even worse. How is this and can it be fixed?
I was wondering if torrents and torrent programs don't work as well in Linux compared to Windows.I have used them in the past but all of a sudden, nothing would work in my Kubuntu install. Absolutely nothing would start. I tried different configurations, settings, but nothing. I left it alone and rebooted and started up XP. I installed Azureus and I didn't do nothing else.I didn't even configure Azureus and left the router settings.I was able to start a download.I've used KTorrent (default) and Azureus before.
I just reinstalled my OS (Ubuntu 10.04) and on a new and faster drive than before. And now it's running slower! I was an IDE drive before and not it's SATA and at higher RPM's. The first thing I noticed was that my game, "Armagetron" was not the same. The graphics are really screwed up in it. It looks like a diff version altogether! And I can't find any other versions. Also the controls were different! I have never had to change the controls before. This is what it use to look like before the format: [URL]. This is what it looks like now: Then I played some other games just to see and test. They don't look different but they definitely LAG.....
I have Etch running in my laptop. I found that if the laptop is only running on battery, the disk seems to performs slower than if I running on a power adapter. How do I possibly check the setting and fix it?
I'm the only user on the system most of the time and I keep it as minimal as possible so it's not other services and programs keeping the disk busy.
First I wanted to install the proprietary software Virtualbox-PURE cuz there is usb support, I need.
Added the Repository and installed it (virtualbox-4.0) and dkms. Here is my sources.list $ cat /etc/apt/sources.list # Debian Hauptrepos deb [URL] squeeze main contrib non-free
# Debian Update-Repos deb [URL] main contrib non-free .....
The result of all is: virtualbox is still not running. I use experimental branch flash is not working now. flashplugin was installed, I restarted my browsers, not working. I tested it with opera, chromium and iceweasel.
My questions are: How I ever can go back to stable? How can I make virtualbox run? How can I make flash run?
I'm using debian squeeze with gnome 2.30.5. When you need more infos or results of commands I give it to you. 2 days of work and nothing is running.
After downloading a Chrome (for Linux of course) installation package via FireFox. Opening it from Downloads, entering the Administrator password. Then clicking on the " Install Package " button in the " Package Installer " window, I get a message: "Only one software management tool is allowed to run at the same time, please close the other application 'synaptic', 'aptitude', or 'update manager' first." I see no evidence of these apps or any others running & I got rid of the Firefox. Are these " Other Apps " hidden somewhere, how do I determine this?
I have used Ubuntu and Linux Mint for quite some time now until I got a new machine. Some friends told me to try OpenSUSE because it has really been polished over the last few years.Install went smoothly got everything working properly except for my video card. My video card is an ATI HD4890 with sound support over HDMI. I had the sound working in Ubuntu using the non-oss ATI drivers. I was wondering if someone could please teach me how to install them again here on OpenSUSE 11.3. My screen fonts and colors also look terrible compared to Windows or Ubuntu.
Is there a way I can make it look better? I remember CCC (Catalyst Control Center for ATI) had two color formats (RGB and YCbCr). I had to set it to YCbCr because my screen is an HDTV and it looked much cleaner than RGB. Is there a way I can acheive similar results with OpenSUSE?
I can't quantify the behavior, but every time I run Ubuntu 10.04 LTS (32-bit), I get the impression that I'm using a much slower machine. All I have to compare it to is my Windows 7 64-bit install on the same machine (specs in signature), where almost everything is very snappy by comparison.
I don't have skipping audio or delayed video when watching DVDs in VLC Media Player, and Urban Terror (a 3D game) runs fine, but just general stuff like browsing the filesystem (Nautilus) and Firefox seems reaaaaallly sluggish compared to the Windows 7 counterparts.
What I'm doing at the time does not appear to affect the sluggishness. I have noticed the same impression of sloth both while copying large files, and while doing nothing in particular. That's not how it's supposed to work, is it? Does an Ubuntu install normally slow down over time? I have only been running 10.04 LTS since last October or so.
I've borrowed a netbook from my girlfriend and she's let me put ubuntu on it so I can do some computing work, I installed 11.04 on it but it was a little slow so I tried 10.04. It looks great, I like it a lot, however it seems to be running a little choppy. The computer switches on and loads up in under a minute, and applications open up in a few seconds, however scrolling (particularly in browsers) is very glitchy looking, as is minimising and opening windows, nothing seems to be running smoothly.
A little info for you: using an ASUS eePC 1101HA, 1GB RAM, 160GB HDD, running Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx Netbook Edition (However I prefer GNOME and removed the netbook launcher), I'm a Mac user but I use the Terminal a lot so I'm fairly confident with basic commands.
Since I use my computer for some intense processor calculations, without any fancy graphical needs, I decided to apply a mild OC on the BIOS settings, to speed thing a bit up.I own an AMD Phenom II 1055T (2.8GHz) cpu. I changed the base freq from 200 to 203, and changed the multipliers of the standard and boost freqs to x15 and x16.5, so now the BIOS reads 3045 MHz and 3349 MHz for both speeds.
I've installed Ubuntu Maverick on a testing machine, a Samsung N510 (Atom N280/2 GB RAM), and I've been quite surprised that I haven't been able, due to slowness, to reproduce MPEG2/DIVX videos (using VLC).When I subsequently installed Windows XP, the videos were playing fluidly.Now, I also noticed, although this may potentially be biased, that the overall responsiveness of the system is a bit slower than when I use Windows XP (drawing speed of objects).I remember having the same feeling I switched (years ago) entirely from Windows to Ubuntu.
Why is video decoding so much slower on Ubuntu?Providing that the second point (desktop system speed) is not biased, is gnome inherently slower than Windows XP's GUI? Why, if so?
I'm posting this here because I have no idea how to address this issue. I have an Ubuntu 11.04 with Windows XP on VirtualBox, Firefox 5 on both machines (virtual and real).I thought my connection was slow when I realized that the browser in VB was much faster than the one in Ubuntu.The problem doesn't seem to be on firefox because Chrome also is slow (I haven't checked Chrome in XP-VB).When I type an address in Firefox Ubuntu it takes a long time to show the page and sometimes the whole browser gets stuck for somewhere around a minute.
I recently switched my mom from Windows to Fedora , and ever since her Internet speed went down. Now it takes, on average, 6-8 seconds longer for her to load a web page with Firefox. Tried to replace the modem -- didn't help. She is on a DSL connection.
But here is the striking part. Her BitTorrent speeds are better than mine, and I have a cable rather than DSL.
I can't for life imagine how these two can coexist. An innocent web page takes forever to load, and torrents are so fast. By the way, she does say that torrents used to be *even* faster on Windows.
The same network environment, no matter which browser I use, my fedora 13 always works slower than windows XP on loading web pages. Others are better than windows -- like memory management...(I directly feel that). applications running more smoothly than those in windows xp.
I want to know how could I make it faster on loading web pages.