Link Details

Fine but when do you open 30 URL? The test is a bit artificial.

I typically have 8-12 tabs, so artificial or not, it does seem to represent the relative merit of Firefox.

Yes, we all know firefox will handle memory better than Chrome. But when a tab crashes what happens to firefox? Memory is cheap now-a-days, but my time waiting for firefox to clean up and restart is not. Don't get me wrong, firefox is still great, but competition is good. Hope the guys at moz-and-company think about some new architectures in the near future.

BTW: this was one badly formatted post. Skip it and go right to the source: http://dotnetperls.com/chrome-memory

Safari 4 is much more stable and predictable than Chrome on Windows if webkit testing is needed.

I disagree that Safari 4 manages memory well. I have had Safari gobble up gigabytes of virtual memory when surfing JavaScript heavy sites like Facebook, MySpace, Youtube, etc. This "feature" can be found in both Windows and Macintosh versions.

Safari 4 has a solid memory management when we use it with our very complex product. I do not know what your experience is about but use ProcessExplorer instead of TaskManager to see the real memory usage. Chome 2.0 is on the other is a complete failure. They have broken a lot of stuff in it which were working just fine on Chrome 1.0 which forced us to remove Chrome from the list of browsers we support. Chrome 2.0 is noticably slower than the 1.0 as well.