Yeah I know, but for instance, my Firefox is using almost a GB of my memory, and overall I'm at 32% of my 8GB, and I'm not really running much, just excel, firefox and remote access. On hers that would be what 64% ish? That's a lot of bogging down. I'll have to run the stats next time I play on hers and see what they look like.
The real constraint isn't the nominal amount of RAM but rather some multiple of it... for simplicity, lets just say the multiple is 2... the OS is turning X amount of RAM into 2X RAM by moving stuff in and out as needed... for practical purposes, you have no control over this, it just does it...and sometimes does it even when you might think it doesn't need to... (both God and operating systems work in mysterious ways... as a Loyola grad, I get to say stuff like that...)
While Firefox uses much more RAM than Chrome for a single tab, it's way more RAM-efficient for a large bunch of tabs... Firefox has high initial overhead but then has just marginal increases per additional tab... with Chrome, each tab is its own instance of Chrome, and for a bunch of tabs it adds up in a hurry... but for just a couple tabs, Chrome is less resource hungry... if we're talking about just a small number of tabs, next time you're bored, compare how Firefox and Chrome do in terms of how responsive they each seem...
Plus, I don't know if Firefox ever really fixed their memory leaks... I quit paying attention to that after years of them sayinig they had when on my machine they sure hadn't... not dissing Firefox, just their memory leaks... which may or may not be fixed by now...
