Just re-tested since I noticed Loucky and I are both using the same anti-virus; when Firefox's memory usage started shooting up, Kaspersky stayed at the same value (73 MB or so) that it had been before the memory leak came into effect.
The other obvious variable to check is Firefox itself. I ran Edge (the only other browser I have installed) for about 2.5kt worth of Tidal (which was about what I had from both the other trials combined) and it stayed in the same 350-370MB range throughout. Heh, the music didn't want to disable, though, so be aware of that if you're gonna try to replicate the experience.
@
LouckyKoneko I'm curious- do you ever run any alternate browsers? I'm wondering if it's a Firefox specific bug, and switching browsers for Fairgrounds is WAY easier than upgrading a laptop.
Just re-tested since I noticed Loucky and I are both using the same anti-virus; when Firefox's memory usage started shooting up, Kaspersky stayed at the same value (73 MB or so) that it had been before the memory leak came into effect.
The other obvious variable to check is Firefox itself. I ran Edge (the only other browser I have installed) for about 2.5kt worth of Tidal (which was about what I had from both the other trials combined) and it stayed in the same 350-370MB range throughout. Heh, the music didn't want to disable, though, so be aware of that if you're gonna try to replicate the experience.
@
LouckyKoneko I'm curious- do you ever run any alternate browsers? I'm wondering if it's a Firefox specific bug, and switching browsers for Fairgrounds is WAY easier than upgrading a laptop.
|
|
She/Her, FR +0
No worms in my username-
R e n a i w o m
I like being pinged, but not mass ones.
I often process thoughts by writing... Trying to TL;DR more.
_______________________________
|
Hatchery
|
@
renaiwom I haven't tried switching browsers, since I don't have Chrome and Edge threw a major hissyfit and crashed twice last time I tried to use it (which, to be fair, was over a year ago and was probably related to a bad update). I can try using Edge.
@
renaiwom I haven't tried switching browsers, since I don't have Chrome and Edge threw a major hissyfit and crashed twice last time I tried to use it (which, to be fair, was over a year ago and was probably related to a bad update). I can try using Edge.
Imagining dragons...
Lucky -
-
fanfiction writer and chronic daydreamer -
@
renaiwom I tried Edge for a short round just now, it's working fine, so it is indeed a Firefox-specific issue.
@
renaiwom I tried Edge for a short round just now, it's working fine, so it is indeed a Firefox-specific issue.
Imagining dragons...
Lucky -
-
fanfiction writer and chronic daydreamer -
its worth noting, this laptop, based on the thread is probably using an IGPU, i.e one built into the CPU, which shares its video ram with the system ram. so its possible to cause a video memory error with any action that takes more ram depending on how the system is configured.
some systems set a minimum video ram usage i.e. 1gb.
so 1gb of the 8 total is dedicated to the video card.
Depending on config, this bar can go up (and back down) above this 1gb floor as needed.
if the gpu is using a part of memory that is then forcibly taken back from it, boop, bluescreen. now this shouldnt happen, but can.
The early games were not developed in HTML5 originally if i recall, whereas the latter were. so probably an issue there.
its worth noting, this laptop, based on the thread is probably using an IGPU, i.e one built into the CPU, which shares its video ram with the system ram. so its possible to cause a video memory error with any action that takes more ram depending on how the system is configured.
some systems set a minimum video ram usage i.e. 1gb.
so 1gb of the 8 total is dedicated to the video card.
Depending on config, this bar can go up (and back down) above this 1gb floor as needed.
if the gpu is using a part of memory that is then forcibly taken back from it, boop, bluescreen. now this shouldnt happen, but can.
The early games were not developed in HTML5 originally if i recall, whereas the latter were. so probably an issue there.
so i just sat in shock switch with no other tabs open for 5+ mins. no appreciable increase in ram usage. infact, loading this forum page is using 60MB more than shock switch did.
[img]https://i.imgur.com/rXCNiNK.png[/img]
[img]https://i.imgur.com/Q1eL1FY.png[/img]
so i just sat in shock switch with no other tabs open for 5+ mins. no appreciable increase in ram usage. infact, loading this forum page is using 60MB more than shock switch did.
