Which browser would be best to use for a slow CPU/low RAM PC?

[jnelsoninjax]

I have been tasked with assisting someone who is using a laptop with an i5 and 4GB of RAM with an HDD, not an SSD. Firefox uses over 50% of the CPU and between 500 to 1 GB of the system's RAM. Putting an SSD in will improve some, and upgrading the RAM (if possible) would also help, but the laptop is quite old and it's questionable whether or not it would be worth putting money into it. For the time being, I would like to know what options are available for browsers, I'm sure that Edge would be rather memory intensive as well, and Chrome would use all the RAM.

[satukoro]

I use operagx on the laptop I use for my tv (256gb ssd, 8gb ram, intel core i3/hd620) and it runs slightly less laggy than firefox (firefox lags pretty hard if I have more than one tab with a video open). Only issue is the operagx ui is terrible imo

[Copernic Reporter]

K-Meleon or  Mypal 68

[cork1958]

What OS is on that thing? An SSD should make a huge difference. It sure did on several of my older laptops that have an even less powerful CPU than that one does. More ram never hurts, but personally, I think that is something that is overrated, as far as increasing any speed.

With the price of SSD's now a days, I think the person who owns that laptop would be quite happy just by doing that.

[ThaCrip]

On 27/09/2023 at 12:10, satukoro said:

I use operagx on the laptop I use for my tv (256gb ssd, 8gb ram, intel core i3/hd620) and it runs slightly less laggy than firefox (firefox lags pretty hard if I have more than one tab with a video open). Only issue is the operagx ui is terrible imo

From May 2012 until sometime in the year 2020 on my main desktop I used to run a i3-2120 (dual core/four thread), also with 8GB of RAM, and I never had any obvious lagging issues with Firefox as it runs pretty much the same as my current i5-3550 (quad core) which I upgraded from that i3-2120 to my current i5-3550 in 2020 (also upgraded RAM to 16GB this same year).

granted, mine is paired with a NVIDIA 1050 Ti 4GB, not the built-in Intel GPU, but I can't imagine that would make any significant difference for general browser usage(?) (especially on Linux since it does not seem to use any GPU acceleration for h264 video playback etc like I think Windows did). then again you mentioned 'laptop' where as I am on a 'desktop' (so I imagine the i3 is less powerful vs a desktop, especially of similar generation CPU) but if that's the case I figure the hardware is pretty much shot if you can't get reasonably quick enough performance for general browsing, especially if it's at a point it's really bothering the user.

p.s. I am using Linux, but I was using Windows (Windows 7 and Windows 10) on that i3-2120 CPU until Jan 2019, which is when I switched to Linux.

[jnelsoninjax]

On 27/09/2023 at 12:20, Copernic said:

K-Meleon or  Mypal 68

Does either work in Windows?

On 27/09/2023 at 12:31, cork1958 said:

What OS is on that thing? An SSD should make a huge difference. It sure did on several of my older laptops that have an even less powerful CPU than that one does. More ram never hurts, but personally, I think that is something that is overrated, as far as increasing any speed.

With the price of SSD's now a days, I think the person who owns that laptop would be quite happy just by doing that.

Win 10

On 27/09/2023 at 15:21, ThaCrip said:

From May 2012 until sometime in the year 2020 on my main desktop I used to run a i3-2120 (dual core/four thread), also with 8GB of RAM, and I never had any obvious lagging issues with Firefox as it runs pretty much the same as my current i5-3550 (quad core) which I upgraded from that i3-2120 to my current i5-3550 in 2020 (also upgraded RAM to 16GB this same year).

granted, mine is paired with a NVIDIA 1050 Ti 4GB, not the built-in Intel GPU, but I can't imagine that would make any significant difference for general browser usage(?) (especially on Linux since it does not seem to use any GPU acceleration for h264 video playback etc like I think Windows did). then again you mentioned 'laptop' where as I am on a 'desktop' (so I imagine the i3 is less powerful vs a desktop, especially of similar generation CPU) but if that's the case I figure the hardware is pretty much shot if you can't get reasonably quick enough performance for general browsing, especially if it's at a point it's really bothering the user.

p.s. I am using Linux, but I was using Windows (Windows 7 and Windows 10) on that i3-2120 CPU until Jan 2019, which is when I switched to Linux.

Which distro would be a good alternative to windows?

[satukoro]

On 27/09/2023 at 15:21, ThaCrip said:

From May 2012 until sometime in the year 2020 on my main desktop I used to run a i3-2120 (dual core/four thread), also with 8GB of RAM, and I never had any obvious lagging issues with Firefox as it runs pretty much the same as my current i5-3550 (quad core) which I upgraded from that i3-2120 to my current i5-3550 in 2020 (also upgraded RAM to 16GB this same year).

granted, mine is paired with a NVIDIA 1050 Ti 4GB, not the built-in Intel GPU, but I can't imagine that would make any significant difference for general browser usage(?) (especially on Linux since it does not seem to use any GPU acceleration for h264 video playback etc like I think Windows did). then again you mentioned 'laptop' where as I am on a 'desktop' (so I imagine the i3 is less powerful vs a desktop, especially of similar generation CPU) but if that's the case I figure the hardware is pretty much shot if you can't get reasonably quick enough performance for general browsing, especially if it's at a point it's really bothering the user.

p.s. I am using Linux, but I was using Windows (Windows 7 and Windows 10) on that i3-2120 CPU until Jan 2019, which is when I switched to Linux.

This is the laptop I bought a few years ago: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01K1IO3QW/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I got it on sale for $350 and put an ssd and another 4gb stick of ram in it. This thing has been dropped a handful of times, been sat on, etc. and it just still keeps on truckin.

It's driving a 4k TV so I'm guessing that's the source of my performance issues while having more than one tab open with a video/stream in it. It can handle one firefox tab without issue, but as soon as I open more it starts to have trouble when I go full screen on a video. This doesn't seem to be an issue in OperaGX, I'm thinking it might be managing background tab resources a bit better.

This is with both debian and windows 10 on it. They perform pretty much the same on this thing.

[satukoro]

On 27/09/2023 at 15:26, jnelsoninjax said:

Which distro would be a good alternative to windows?

If you're looking for lightweight but also pleasant, I know folks around here are fond of Linux Mint which offers an XFCE (lightweight desktop environment) flavor. I personally use debian 12 + gnome on my crappy laptop (and on the desktop) and am happy with it.

Here's a short list of lightweight distros: https://itsfoss.com/lightweight-linux-beginners/

I've used Lubuntu and Xubuntu before with pretty good results on really slow laptops. I think with linux the distro doesn't matter as much as the desktop environment.

[ThaCrip]

On 27/09/2023 at 15:26, jnelsoninjax said:

Which distro would be a good alternative to windows?

While I am sure opinions vary on some level... I tend to stick with Mint as I think it's one of the better choices for a Windows user coming to Linux. I have been on Linux Mint since I dumped Windows in Jan 2019 and each major version of that is supported for nearly 5 years. like current Mint 21.x series for example was released about mid-2022 and is supported until April 2027. which basically means about mid-2024 will be Mint 22.x and that should be supported until April 2029 etc. the current Mint 21.x series is based on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS.

there is a Debian edition of Mint called LMDE, but that's sort of a side project in case anything major happens and the Mint team does not like they can migrated to a Debian base. but it only comes with Cinnamon. I would suggest people stick with the main edition in general, but it's your call.

but in regards to Mint it basically offers three DE's (desktop environments) Cinnamon/MATE/Xfce. Cinnamon is sort of their main/flagship DE but I use Xfce on my main PC and backup desktop/laptop since I have issues related to video playback (not in the browser) in relation to playing x264 720p/1080p video files through Celluloid paired with MPV for hardware accelerated video playback etc, which don't exist on Xfce. but my CPU on my main PC is probably considered 'old' by today's tech standards as it's from 2012 and my other two computers (desktop/laptop) CPU's are definitely slower than my main PC.

I run the newest Mint... Mint 21.2-Xfce (runs a 5.15 kernel by default which that kernel itself is from Oct/Nov 2021 which is plenty recent enough for hardware that's not quite recent). but even the small upgrades on Mint (i.e. 21.0, 21.1, 21.2, 21.3) tend to be about 6 months apart and after the last one, 21.3 which will likely be Dec 2023 or Jan 2024, it will stay on that for the rest of it's life. but 6 months later will be the next 'major' release.

but when it comes to Linux in general... regardless if you stick with Mint or not, I tend to be of the mindset that it's best to stick with a Debian or Ubuntu based Linux distro since those tend to be well supported and are a safer bet in general. because while there is no precise standard when it comes to desktop Linux, I would say a Debian or Ubuntu base is probably as close as it gets. but other distro's might work well to. but I have no desire to dump Mint personally as it's not the 'latest and greatest' but at the same time is not too conservative either like Debian tends to be. so I guess at least on paper... it's sort of a trade off between the newest stuff and might potentially sacrifice system stability vs running a more conservative distro, say Debian based, that generally runs a bit older stuff but supposedly one gains more stability. I think the standard Mint (Ubuntu based) strikes a good balance of things.

 

On 27/09/2023 at 15:38, satukoro said:

It's driving a 4k TV so I'm guessing that's the source of my performance issues while having more than one tab open with a video/stream in it. It can handle one firefox tab without issue, but as soon as I open more it starts to have trouble when I go full screen on a video.

Yeah, maybe that's a possibility.

because in my example, on my main PC, I am using standard 1080p (1920x1080), but with two screens (monitor/TV, both 1920x1080).

p.s. but looking at the specs of that laptop, while the CPU is 7th gen i3, it's still only 2-core/4-thread and runs at a slower clock speed (apparently 2.4GHz) vs a typical desktop variation as my 3rd gen i5 'claims' 3.2GHz base frequency but, at least on my ASUS motherboard by default, it really runs at 3.5GHz when under a heavy load (I undervolted mine a bit to cut back on heat) as certain very small bursts ill see it touch 3.7GHz but it's very brief as I just tend to call it 3.5GHz since that's what it runs stable at under a heavy load.

[Mockingbird]

Microsoft Edge

Which Browser Uses the Least RAM and CPU on Windows, macOS, and ChromeOS? (makeuseof.com)

[+InsaneNutter MVC]

An i5 and 4gb of ram could literally be anything released in the last 13-14 years. Regardless the processor is probably not the issue unless the laptop is overheating and thermal throttling itself, or possibly some very resource intensive antivirus is installed.

Windows is probably thrashing the hard drive a lot slowing things down, so you probably would notice an improvement with an SSD, bonus if you can double the ram to 8gb.

I find Edge works fine on older machines, a content filtering plugin such as uBlock might help also depending on the website.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

On 27/09/2023 at 20:26, jnelsoninjax said:

Which distro would be a good alternative to windows?

Linux Mint is a solid replacement for Windows. Years ago I also installed Zorin for someone that wasn't tech-savvy, and they were hardly able to see a difference between that and Windows.

My laptop is about 10 years old now. During that time I switched from a HDD to a SSD, and I upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 8GB. It made a world of difference, and switching from Windows to Linux showed a substantial drop in RAM usage by the OS.

[xrobwx71]

SSD will definitely help. Win 10 needs at least 8GB RAM to breath a little better. 

I faced this exact issue with my mom's laptop and it helped tremendously.

[Mockingbird]

Memory and SSD are so cheap nowadays

PCPartPicker Part List

Memory: G.Skill F3-12800CL11D-8GBSQ 8 GB (2 x 4 GB) DDR3-1600 SODIMM CL11 Memory  ($20.60 @ MemoryC) 
Storage: TEAMGROUP T-Force Vulcan Z 480 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive  ($21.49 @ Amazon) 
Total: $42.09
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2023-09-28 10:56 EDT-0400

[spikey_richie]

Take a look at Palemoon browser.

[ThaCrip]

As you can see a general pattern in the comments so far... 8GB of RAM / SSD. hard to go wrong with that combo for general web browsing, at least for many (if not most(?)) people.

I tend to see RAM like this as a general guideline for quite a while now (since the following is true for a high percentage of people)...

-2GB of RAM = absolute minimum. because any lower than this, doing just about anything will burn through it very quickly, even on Linux.

-4GB of RAM = realistic minimum. this is a usable computer.

-8GB of RAM = recommended minimum. while limited to some degree, it's not nearly as obvious, and for people who largely just browse the web this is probably the sweet-spot, especially if a person is trying to keep upgrade cost etc to a minimum.

-16GB of RAM = the sweet spot for probably the majority of users/uses as the gains beyond this point tend to take a solid hit for a lot of people in my estimations as I suspect 16GB of RAM will still be respectable for the foreseeable future (call it through at least the current decade).

-32GB of RAM = recommended maximum. any higher than this is a waste of money for the vast majority of people in my estimations and will probably remain so for the foreseeable future (call it through at least the current decade).

I might even argue a SSD becomes more important if you got 4-8GB of RAM than if you got more RAM because of increase virtual memory usage which means more HDD activity and regular hard drives can slow to a crawl if you are accessing multiple things at once.

8GB of RAM or 16GB of RAM is what I would generally stick with for most people as it's a safe bet and you don't risk wasting money that way. but at the same time if 32GB of RAM is cheap enough, it would start to look more appealing on the side of being extra future proof. but I will say if I was building a computer I would not put in less than 16GB of RAM as that will tend to be 'good enough' (if not more than good enough) for the easy majority of users in my estimations although with 32GB of RAM you should be fairly future proof for probably at least the next 5-10 years, call it through this current decade at least.

anyways, in regards to browser... out of the major browsers I suspect Firefox is the best choice for a low RAM situation. but even here, there is only so much a browser can help as if you don't have a usable amount of RAM (say 4GB of RAM minimum given what I said above (but if you got only 4GB of RAM, a SSD is probably all the more important), your just screwed outright. because if you are nit picking over the browser, chances are your hardware is running on the edge.