Sunday, July 19, 2009

Opera 10 beta2 vs. K-MeleonCCF ME 0.096

With the new release of Opera 10 Beta2 and K-MeleonCCF ME 0.096 coming out, I decided to make a simple test of both browsers. drool smiley

I) Memory Usage

First I am concerned of memory usage cause it's crucial for older system on which both browsers are popular.

1. Startup memory usage
At startup with no tabs open, K-Meleon cost less memory than Opera:

2. One website memory usage (
For testing the memory usage for just one website open, I delibrately open to see which browser cost more memory:

K-Meleon only consumed half of the memory of Opera 10.

3. Several website memory usage
To see which browser can handle better memory usage when several websites open at the same time. I openned 6 websites:


together in both browsers, here is the result:

K-Meleon has better performance than Opera 10

4. Memory release performance
It's also important for browser to release memory when tabs are closed. So I closed all tabs in last test, the memory usage of both browsers after this is as follow:

K-Meleon has better performance than Opera 10

II) Javascript performance

Thanks to the latest treacemonkey js engine from Mozilla, K-Meleon's JS performance is more superior than Opera 10: (Test page: [])

III) CSS Loading performance

Opera 10 does have some speed advantages over K-Meleon, like CSS loading performance, with the test page:

Opera 10 is a little faster than K-Meleon:

IV) Results

From data above, you can see that if you have an older system with slower CPU and less memory, you want to use a fast, responsive and very customizable browser, K-Meleon is much better choice than Opera 10 in this sense.


Anonymous said...

how about the compareation bewteen 0.095 and 0.096?

Anonymous said...

0.095 vs 0.096? LOL

Much better to compare 0.08x vs 0.09x

indavao said...

hi... just dropping by!

Anonymous said...

JavaScript test on ThinkPad 600X 500 Mhz & 384 MB RAM, Windows XP:

Internet Explorer 8 + IE7Pro 2.4.6
Average time: 2414ms

K-MeleonCCF ME 0.096
Average time: 1773ms

SRWare Iron (18153), based on Chromium
Average time: 262ms

Anonymous said...

its true that memory is ccf is quite nice compared to others but its bugs and sometimes strange behaviour need to be polished and when is more polished and has some of the extensions that firefox has , then well it would be beyond good and then we could advertise it like crazy as a lightweight and fast alternative browser

Anonymous said...

what about CSS Loading speed? How to upgrade them?

Anonymous said...

Animáció készítése GIMP-ben. Hogyan feketítsük be az Xterm ablakot. Cellux képsarok. DTP Toolbox - Szövegszerkesztők. Hónap színei. Scrapbooks gone digital. Ubuntu telepítése sík hülyéknek. Monitor kalibrálása 12 pontban: Szervízmenük a KDE4-ben. Mi a LYX? IBM Lotus Symphony telepítése, használata. Emberi bőrszínek: Windows ikon kinyerése Linuxon. Ubuntu telepítése sík hülyéknek. Csomagkészítés rejtelmei kezdő szemmel. Az iDesk használata. Macintosh és a Linux. Scribus document icon. Partícionálás Linux rendszerekben.
Hogy telepítsük a pdftk-t Mandriva 2009.1-re? Bemutató készítése LYX-el. Alma készítése Inkscape-pel: Scribus tévhitek és cáfolataik. ISO lemezkép írása. Ingyen Xara. LyX és az SVG. Álruhák használata. Hasznos holmik iskolakezdésre.