Why are Chrome and Firefox so SLOW to load?

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

  1. Posts : 161
    Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bits
       #21

    I bought my old HP laptop in 2004. It has an AMD Athlon 64 3400+ CPU. It started with 1GB DDR RAM and Window XP Home. I upgraded it to 2GB DDR RAM and Windows 7 Home. It still has its original 80GB IDE/PATA hard drive.

    Browsers
    • Chrome: 88.0.4324.190 *
    • Edge: 99.0.1150.55 *
    • Firefox: 98.0.2

    * Note the Athlon 64 3400+ Clawhammer supports SSE 1&2 but not SSE3. This limits updates of Chrome and Edge browsers.

    Load time for browsers (1st time/2nd time) **:
    • Chrome: 39/6 seconds
    • Edge: 27/6 seconds
    • Firefox: 68/12 seconds

    ** Notes:
    1. Time was from start to load of Google search home page
    2. Because both Edge and Chrome browsers are based on Chromium, computer was booted between tests.
      My Computer


  2. Posts : 1,746
    Windows 8.1 Industry Pro x64
       #22

    @F22 Simpilot the core 2 duo is dual core.You can tell based upon the duo add on. Intel Core 2 - Wikipedia
      My Computers


  3. Posts : 6,086
    Windows 7 Ultimate x64
       #23

    Yeah.. I kinda know what duo means... It's why I brought up the subject of my parent's computer...

    I made mention of the architecture...

    The One and Only said:
    It could very well be his CPU since he's mentioned in other threads it's only 2 GHz. But I kinda doubt that would be an issue either.

    My parent's computer is around 3.5 GHz if I remember. I know I bought the fastest clock speed for that model.

    It's conceivably possible a slow clock and slow hard drive could make for a slow to load browser. Without invoking safe mode in the browser like I mentioned we'll never know. But there are possible other factors that can slow the browser down. To rule that out the OP would have to install a temporally copy of 7 on another hard disk, install Firefox or use portable Firefox and see if there's a difference.

    - - - Updated - - -

    MisterEd said:
    It still has its original 80GB IDE/PATA hard drive.
    Ever see these? Amazon.com

    Price is an absolute rip off since the manufacture just changes some chips and the interface. I've seen other brands...

    Just so you and everyone knows if no one knows. IDE (Integrated Drive Electronics) describes both PATA and SATA. IDE has been misused and is a misnomer to PATA. IDE came about sometime late '80s if I can remember. Just means the electronics are onboard the drive versus needing a dedicated board in the computer... So because of that, I NEVER say IDE to describe PATA. I just say PATA. Or SATA, or SCSI...

    I suppose most people call it that for three reasons:

    1) We've been using PATA since the dawn of apes until SATA came about.

    2) There's a better word to describe this, but it's physiological withen the chain of custody of "apparent knowledge" garnered throughout one's Internet travels... Same applies to all forms of the media and one's government overseers.

    3) When in Rome...When in Rome, do as the Romans do - Wikipedia
      My Computer


  4. Posts : 1,746
    Windows 8.1 Industry Pro x64
       #24

    This computer isn't built for modern computing. 4 gb of ram and a slow 15 year old processor. It's a tired computer. I have an even older one with 2003 on it. I don't rely upon it, expect much from it, or really even use it. There isn't much I can do with it. Why do I keep it? My primary one is 10 yo but it was high end at the time it was built. It has a quad core i7 with hyper threading and 8 gb or ram so it has plenty of life left in it. It may not have as much compared to a current one but it is very sufficient for my needs because I am not a gamer. Best yet it was free. Why get something new with 11 slapped on it?
      My Computers


  5. Posts : 161
    Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bits
       #25

    F22 Simpilot said:
    Just so you and everyone knows if no one knows. IDE (Integrated Drive Electronics) describes both PATA and SATA. IDE has been misused and is a misnomer to PATA. IDE came about sometime late '80s if I can remember. Just means the electronics are onboard the drive versus needing a dedicated board in the computer... So because of that, I NEVER say IDE to describe PATA. I just say PATA. Or SATA, or SCSI...
    I suppose most people call it that for three reasons:
    1) We've been using PATA since the dawn of apes until SATA came about.
    2) There's a better word to describe this, but it's physiological withen the chain of custody of "apparent knowledge" garnered throughout one's Internet travels... Same applies to all forms of the media and one's government overseers.
    3) When in Rome...When in Rome, do as the Romans do - Wikipedia
    Excuse me for going off topic...

    When I bought the Maxtor 80 GB IDE hard drive in November 2002 there was no ambiguity in what IDE meant. That is simply because SATA drives didn't exit yet. My motherboard had 2 SATA connectors on it but no drives were available to buy. I remember some people used IDE to SATA converters so they could plug their existing IDE drives into the SATA ports but I thought that pointless. Some of the first SATA drives in 2003 were existing IDE drives with integrated IDE to SATA bridge circuits. I also thought these pointless. It was late 2003 or 2004 before native SATA drives came out. The first native SATA drives were 150MB/s.

    The more correct term Parallel ATA was used interchangeably with IDE but IDE was more commonly used. After SATA drives came out Parallel ATA was shortened to PATA.

    Technically correct or not everyone I knew back then used the term IDE for their Parallel ATA drives. I never even heard the term PATA until years later when SATA drives were being discussed.
    I still have a few IDE/PATA drives left that I use in my oldest computers. My stock of them is slowly failing so I will retire these old computers when I have no IDE/PATA drives left.

    Now back to the topic of this thread ...
      My Computer


  6. Posts : 199
    Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit (now looking at Linux Mint!)
    Thread Starter
       #26

    townsbg said:
    This computer isn't built for modern computing. 4 gb of ram and a slow 15 year old processor. It's a tired computer. I have an even older one with 2003 on it. I don't rely upon it, expect much from it, or really even use it. There isn't much I can do with it. Why do I keep it? My primary one is 10 yo but it was high end at the time it was built. It has a quad core i7 with hyper threading and 8 gb or ram so it has plenty of life left in it. It may not have as much compared to a current one but it is very sufficient for my needs because I am not a gamer. Best yet it was free. Why get something new with 11 slapped on it?
    Preciselymy situation.

    It is a backup machine, I'm not a gamer and it was free.

    Zaph
      My Computer


  7. Posts : 1,746
    Windows 8.1 Industry Pro x64
       #27

    @ZaphodB You can't beat free. Especially if it still works. My uncle had it set up but wasn't using it so when the graphics card on my 2010 imac went out he offered it to me and I said yes. I've had a lot of freebies that others didn't want. More so than purchased ones. I've had to replace the hdd in this computer but everything else is just fine. It kept me having to shell out $800+ for a computer with 11 on it and I was able to put 8.1 on it. I could've put 7 on it but I decided not to and haven't regretted it. With open shell I can actually stand it. I kid you not but I didn't have to install any drivers on this puppy. Not graphics drivers, chipset drivers, or usb 3 drivers. I was amazed by that. I wouldn't have had that with 7. It even has a nice graphics card on it (considering its age) and a bd rom. My uncle didn't scrimp on this machine. It could probably play crysis.
      My Computers


  8. Posts : 161
    Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bits
       #28

    I am glad people are able to use computers that are free to them but there also something to be said of not discarding a computer when it is still of some use. The HP laptop I bought in 2004 cost $1500 so I am reluctant to discard it. I have several other much newer and faster computers so I don't need it for myself. Instead I have set it up on the dining room table for family and friends to use when they come by. For browsers it has Edge and Firefox. Nobody complains because it is much better for browsing the Internet than the phone they normally use.
      My Computer


  9. Posts : 59
    Windows 7 Pro 64-bit
       #29

    yes,
    very slow. FF is also getting more and more freezing up (black screen). Therefore my son asked me to move to Microsoft edge.

    I have been using FF since Windows XP. It was a good browser.

    Computer hardware could be an issue. but my family, especially my kids are using relatively new computer hardware (6th-8th) CPU, SSD, 16GB RAM. Win10/11. I heard their complaints often if NOT daily recently. They have moved to edge. i.e. new computer hardware can see similar issue too.
      My Computer


  10. Posts : 1,746
    Windows 8.1 Industry Pro x64
       #30

    Nope. Don't use Chrome or Edge. Use a privacy oriented derivative such as chromium.
      My Computers


 
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

  Related Discussions
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 19:23.
Find Us