Testing memory efficiency is a multi-step process. First, we open each Web browser with one tab and record its memory usage. We then open 39 additional tabs and re-record the memory usage total. Next, we close those 39 tabs and record the memory total once more. We've removed the second reading after closing 39 tabs, and instead just wait for the big usage drop to occur for each browser, and record once.
All pages are opened in each browser before testing, so the memory tests are loading cached pages; the browsers are started hot. Memory usage totals are now taken using Chrome's built-in about:memory page instead of Windows Task Manager because it is far more accurate dealing with multi-process browsers such as Chrome, IE10, and Opera Next. We also combined our remaining three memory usage readings into a single chart.

IE10 takes the lead in single-tab usage at just 40 MB, followed by Opera Next at 75 MB. Opera 12 takes third place, with Firefox and Chrome placing fourth and fifth (respectively) at around 120 MB with a single tab open.
With a heavy-duty workload of 40 tabs, it's Firefox that uses the least amount of memory. Opera Next places a distant second with a tally of almost 1.2 GB. Close behind in third place is IE10. Chrome and Opera 12 practically tie for last place, with both browsers just over the 1.5 GB mark.
After decreasing the workload back down to a single tab, Opera Next takes the lead. Chrome is in second place at just under 200 MB, followed by IE10 and Firefox 22 in third and fourth place (respectively) at around 270 MB each. As usual, the current version of Opera ends up in last place, holding onto a whopping gigabyte of RAM.
It looks like Opera Next is a move in the right direction for all three memory usage scenarios.
Next, the Single Tab figure is subtracted from the 39 Tabs Closed number to see how much "bloat" remains after decreasing the workload (closing tabs).

The championship-ineligible Opera Next gets closer to its original single-tab total than any other browser at a difference of just 65 MB. As you might expect, Chrome is close behind with a difference of 76 MB. Firefox 22, though it uses the least amount of memory under load, retains 165 MB more than before the 39 additional tabs were opened, placing third. Surprisingly, IE10 places fourth. Chrome's about:memory page is clearly much better at tallying Internet Explorer's multiple processes than Windows Task Manager. Opera 12 again winds up in last place, retaining nearly an entire gigabyte.
- Opera: Has The Fat Lady Sung?
- Chrome, Firefox, IE, Opera
- Test Setup And Benchmark Suite
- Wait Times: Start-Up
- Wait Times: Page Load
- JavaScript And DOM Performance
- HTML5 And CSS3 Performance
- Hardware Acceleration Performance
- Memory Efficiency
- Reliability And Security
- Standards Conformance
- The WBGP XVI Winner's Circle
While this is interesting, I still encounter built-in pages (such as on routers or other network devices) that will not render cleanly in Firefox, but are perfect in IE. More often than not though, pages that would be filled with nuisance ads and popups are cleaned up nicely by Firefox with AdBlock+ and NoScript.
I have both and start up times for IE are quick but page load times are horrendously slow, whereas FF has slow start up times but superfast page load times. It's possible that add-ons are contributing to that.
1) Pages load noticeably slower
2) Memory usage is indeed high (as seen in the benchmark above)
3) FF add-ons are much better than chrome extensions.
I never noticed any startup time difference for both FF and Chrome; it's possible they're both fast enough that it doesn't even matter at this point. I also like the FF toolbars better although that's really more of a personal preference. I've never tried maxthon though; heard it's pretty good.
I'll miss a hell of a lot of stuff when I move off Presto-based Opera.
Still, this test shows us once more, that no modern browser - I exclude Opera from this, since it isn't a maintained release anymore - must absolutely be replaced by the winner of such tests. If you don't mind performance weaknesses of the Internet Explorer in certain areas, or if your most-accessed websites don't require you to use a certain alternative, then even Microsoft's browser of choice can be okay for daily use (if only as an engine in products like Avant, Maxthon, etc).
The one thing I'm a bit curious about: why does Opera Next suddenly behave so differently from Chrome? Yes, there's a difference between Chrome 27 (WebKit) and Opera Next (Blink = Chrome 28), but if that's the only reason for the browser's weaker showing, then the future of Chrome doesn't look too good. What's your take on this?
I'm guessing it should have said i5-3570K.
Can I make a request for your next test? Try comparing SSDs and HDDs in some of the tests, especially cold boot. They are becoming more and more popular, and at least with some of these tests, I imagine they do have a significant impact on performance.
When the Chromium-based version becomes stable, it will be called Opera.
I love customizability and plug-in support of Firefox. I also love the separate address and search bars. If I type "IBM" into the address bar I want to go directly to the website, if I want to search then I'll use the search bar. Unfortunately, whenever I install Firefox, I have to re-enable the "go directly to the website" ability in the address bar because, starting with Firefox 4, some dork at Mozilla changed the functionality of the address bar.
Up/down keys are your friend.
One other pet peeve I have is that the autopredict in browsers have a habit of interpreting '192.168.1.1' as '192.168.1.104', if you visit the latter more frequently. Someone disable autopredict for IP addresses, and I will use your browser.