Pretty much.
I use Firefox and Safari. I also have an un-Googled version of Chrome for when it's absolutely necessary for a poorly coded website.
To me it's essentially malware.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Chrome Used 10X More RAM Than Safari on macOS Big Sur in Recent Test [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I use Firefox and Safari. I also have an un-Googled version of Chrome for when it's absolutely necessary for a poorly coded website.
To me it's essentially malware.
I’m a web developer and designer. My peers often seem surprised to learn that Safari is my primary browser. It’s pretty good nowadays. Of course I still use Chrome and Firefox for testing, but I close them out when finished (I also use Chrome for using any Google products like Lighthouse testing). And honestly there are only a few minor issues that come up between browsers nowadays. Firefox isn’t half bad and that was my main browser until switching to Safari a couple years ago.
That being said, about two weeks ago I somehow managed to get Safari using 45 of 64GB of RAM on my 2019 5K iMac. So it’s not perfect.
That being said, about two weeks ago I somehow managed to get Safari using 45 of 64GB of RAM on my 2019 5K iMac. So it’s not perfect.
Never seen the appeal either. I use Firefox and Safari. Can't see why somebody would actively want Google tracking their stuff.
IMO a broader issue is how much effing memory apps use these days! Call me oldschool but IMO individual apps really shouldn't be using more RAM than legacy OS' used to use. I dunno the tech details but surely there's waste going on...
I'd like to see this same test done with Firefox so I know if it seeming utterly and completely broken is just my system, an extension I'm using, or the browser itself.
Firefox is regularly maxing out all 6 cores on an i9 MBP, to the point the entire UI of Big Sur hangs for several seconds. In the entire lifetime of OS X, since the Public Beta, I have not seen a single app cause that much havoc. I honestly didn't even know a single app COULD cause that much havoc.
Firefox is regularly maxing out all 6 cores on an i9 MBP, to the point the entire UI of Big Sur hangs for several seconds. In the entire lifetime of OS X, since the Public Beta, I have not seen a single app cause that much havoc. I honestly didn't even know a single app COULD cause that much havoc.
Our intranet runs on Salesforce and in Safari none of the images load until you turn off the privacy setting for cross-site tracking, obviously we want it on but Salesforce claim it’s not there problem and we should turn it off despite no other sites we have ever use requires it the be off to load images.
Last edited:
I have no love for Chrome and its tracking shenanigans, and it's also true that it's isn't shy about using all them memory it can find, my experience just doesn't support this conclusion. Safari uses a ton more memory than Chrome 500MB-1GB per site compared to 200-300MB of Chrome (I've just checked), making it totally unusable on a 8GB Mac. It also does not help, that when it runs out of memory, it totally locks up the system/starts crashing randomly compared to Chrome, which starts killing tabs quietly in the background.
I would agree and Edge was my choice too - until I tried Brave. Brave is just as good as Edge, it is based on the same Chromium source code, allows users to install apps from the Chrome Store, but is even more secure. It is now my browser of choice on my M1 Mac Mini.
Looking at my Intel MacBook Pro on Big Sur 11.2.1, I can only conclude that this article is completely bogus at least for Intel Mac's. Each of my tabs in Safari uses 400 - 800 MB in a separate process. I have only one plugin in Safari, the Dashlane password manager. That plugin alone uses 800 MB as well in a separate process.
My guess would be that the YouTube site is sneakily insisting that a significant portion of an ad’s stream must be delivered to the client browser before it allows the user to progress (server code can easily enforce that process). My further guess is that the ad blocker whites out the ad while it is being streamed, as it can stop certain elements in the page from rendering. Google/YouTube won’t know you didn’t see the ad, the advertiser will pay for the view, and you will be shown a white screen with an annoying delay rather than seeing an annoying ad plus an annoying delay.
There‘s only so much that can be done to hide ads. Imagine if instead of a video stream you requested a single large image, and the image contained within it an annoying ad banner. It’s very unlikely any kind of ad blocker would be able to show the image minus the ad banner.
Said that, AFAIK Safari still does limit what an adblocker can do against more sophisticated ads. These limitations are the reason uBlock Origin was discontinued for Safari a while ago:
https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158 (emphasis mine)
uBlock Origin on Firefox has no issue blocking YouTube ads.
Further confirmation from 1Blocker's FAQ (emphasis mine):
Last edited:
I switched to a Mac Mini a few months ago and was using Chrome as it was what I was familiar with.
Have now moved everything over to Safari on the Mac and iPhone, and deleted Chrome from both. Chrome kept crashing on the iPhone anyway.
I sometimes use Brave.
Have now moved everything over to Safari on the Mac and iPhone, and deleted Chrome from both. Chrome kept crashing on the iPhone anyway.
I sometimes use Brave.
How does Edge compare?
It sounds like it has the good parts of Chrome (the Chromium engine) without all the bad parts (Google's spying)
It sounds like it has the good parts of Chrome (the Chromium engine) without all the bad parts (Google's spying)
I have Chrome installed just so I can watch YouTubeTV since it doesn't work with Safari. Otherwise I use Safari for everything.
Google need the extra space to gather all your personal info to sell and use to determine your political purity.
Ironic that the ad company, Google, doesn't gimp their browser from completely blocking ads while the lip service privacy/blah blah company, Apple, gimps their Safari to allow ads.
As for memory utilization, people are forgetting Google's dominance in education market with Chromebooks that have as little as 4GB of DRAM. $250 4GB Lenovo Duet Chromebook browser works as well if not better than Safari on $900 8GB Macbook Air M1 Chromebook wannabe filled with Apple subscription adware that uses up memory.
Last edited:
Google has its controversial Manifest v3 in the pipeline, which would likely limit adblocking capabilities.
Anything can happen but it's 2021 and we're at Chrome 88 as mentioned in the article and it hasn't happened. Google apparently isn't as evil as Apple plus there's more equal competition now with the likes of Microsoft Chromium Edge so more pressure against it happening. Google knows that their users aren't blind like Apple users and will easily switch browsers unless you're stuck on iOS/iPadOS where you're locked into Apple Webkit regardless of using different browser.
Last edited: