How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
1–10 of 136 posts
Re: How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
#2Cool, but it doesn't matter that no-extension is much faster because we can't browse without ad blocking. Even if it slows the page, it is still preferable. On the other hand ad blocking wastes less bandwidth and memory.
Re: How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
#3Cool, but it doesn't matter that no-extension is much faster because we can't browse without ad blocking. Even if it slows the page, it is still preferable. On the other hand ad blocking wastes less bandwidth and memory.
I don't think you read the graph right. Without ad-blocking extensions, the browser is of course much slower, about 15 times slower according to their tests.
Re: How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
#4> a website allowlist
Ridiculous. It's even called whitelist in the code snippet.
Re: How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
#5Cool, but it doesn't matter that no-extension is much faster because we can't browse without ad blocking. Even if it slows the page, it is still preferable. On the other hand ad blocking wastes less bandwidth and memory.
> DuckDuckGo Privacy Essentials reduces the CPU time of the article page from 31s to just 1.6s. All other tested extensions also bring CPU time down to at most 10s.
It doesn't even slow down the pages, the opposite is true here.
Re: How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
#6Not at all surprising that the worst two extensions by a long way are both from Avira.
Yesterday I opened Chrome and received a warning that the Avira extension had been installed.
I certainly did not install it willingly. I'm pretty sure I didn't install any other software that sneakily bundled it recently, either - I mean, I'm 99.9% sure that I haven't installed _any_ software in the past week. So how why did it suddenly show up? I reported it to Chrome from the web extensions store. Highly unlikely that they'll do anything about it though.
Re: How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
#7> a website allowlist Ridiculous. It's even called whitelist in the code snippet.
I knew someone would be here clutching pearls over this. Thanks for making sure I wasn't disappointed.
Re: How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
#8All the tests were done on an n2-standard-2 gcp instance... That doesn't have a GPU. Rendering a webpage without a GPU uses a lot of different codepaths and isn't awfully representative of performance with a GPU.
Re: How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
#9> a website allowlist Ridiculous. It's even called whitelist in the code snippet.
and it's called 'url' in the code snippet but the article called it a 'website'. it's not all that hard to figure out what they are referring to.
Re: How the most popular Chrome extensions affect browser performance
#10Cool, but it doesn't matter that no-extension is much faster because we can't browse without ad blocking. Even if it slows the page, it is still preferable. On the other hand ad blocking wastes less bandwidth and memory.
I don't think you read the graph right. Without ad-blocking extensions, the browser is of course much slower, about 15 times slower according to their tests.
I am doubtful of some of the numbers here... I mean I know browsing the web without an ad blocker is bad, but it isn't 'takes 35 seconds to load an article on gigabit ethernet' bad....