Adblock ultimate vs adblock plus plus#
If you disable acceptable ads, Adblock Plus goes from being dead last to a blocker that performs similar to the rest. But as it got a couple of firsts and a second, we would say ♛lock Origin is the definite winner, it truly is fast and efficient as the author claims. Both Ghostery and Adguard are still excellent choices and are viable alternatives to ♛lock Origin providing good performance in all 3 categories. The winner in Chrome is a closer call when you consider the results from all three tests. µ AdBlock is a fair choice if you want an easy to use but fast blocker, the rest are almost identical so it’s down to personal preference and the options available as to which one you use. The overall winner in Firefox is simply the quickest, and that was ♛lock origin. On the whole, an ad blocker’s memory usage is not a major concern with multiple tabs open, but its CPU usage can be, and the less CPU cycles taken from the browser itself, the better. What does go up is the strain on the browser itself while loading multiple tabs, and it will use far more memory and processing power.Ī more efficient ad blocker is preferable in this case so it and the browser are not fighting over resources. What might surprise some is that with 10 tabs open and all test websites loading at once, an ad blocker’s memory usage doesn’t alter massively, the CPU usage can go up but it’s not a cumulative increase and having 10 tabs open won’t increase memory or CPU usage by 10 times. AdBlock, Adguard, AdRemover and SuperBlock all have an acceptable ads option of some sort, but none suffer a performance drop like ABP. Whatever your opinion on acceptable ads, using the option in ABP is not recommended and if you wish to support showing specific ads while browsing, use something else. Disable “Allow some non-intrusive advertising” and AdBlock Plus will performance wise, sit in the middle of the pack. If you’re wondering why the popular AdBlock Plus got low scores in some Chrome tests, the answer is simple and it’s purely down to the acceptable ads check box. All Firefox ad blockers were very close in the end, but like in Chrome, ♛lock Origin managed to get a 0.4 second lead over everything else.
Here are the combined load times for all 9 websites in Firefox (tmz.com wasn’t tested).Īlthough not what we’re looking at, it’s interesting to see that Firefox was slower than Chrome to load our test pages in all but one test. AdBlock Plus was the most CPU intensive, more on that below. AdBlock and the AdBlock based extensions all struggled to control their CPU usage on a number of sites. ΜBlock Origin won this time as well, being the least taxing on the CPU by an average of almost 2% over Ghostery, Adguard was a close third.
Adblock ultimate vs adblock plus pro#
SuperBlock Pro was the highest memory user, followed by AdBlock and AdRemover. The previous winner ♛lock Origin is second but it’s memory usage did vary a bit site by site. Adguard was also very consistent and rarely strayed far from its 52MB average. There’s certainly more of a difference in the average peak memory usage, Ghostery was incredibly efficient averaging a peak of 37MB across all 10 websites. Ghostery would’ve been faster if it hadn’t tripped up at. Two stand out, AdBlock Plus for being noticeably slower than the rest, and ♛lock Origin for being a good 0.4 seconds faster than anything else. Most averaged 3.6 – 3.8 seconds with a time to display the untouched page of 10.5 seconds.
The results show that on average an ad blocker can reduce the time it takes to load a page with ads by around two thirds. Here are the combined average scores for all 10 websites in Chrome. It’s time to look at all the scores from the test websites as a combined total to see what the ad blockers have done overall.
0 kommentar(er)
