Theoretical Questions: RuneScape Performance

[SoulWars]

Which browser would theoretically run RuneScape the best in terms of smoothness and stability? Why?

 

Kthxbai :)

[jjjon123]

Firefox, Because I said

 

IE: too slow in general

Chrome: too much cpu usage

[Gandalf14141]

Shouldn't it technically be the RS browser that Jagex puts out?

[Kirbyallstar]

Swiftkit, yo. Lets you take dem pics.

[Gandalf14141]

Swiftkit, yo. Lets you take dem pics.

 

You can do that by pressing "Prnt Scrn" on your keyboard...

[Georgelemmons]

Swiftkit, yo. Lets you take dem pics.

 

You can do that by pressing "Prnt Scrn" on your keyboard...

 

Swiftkit saves files instantly without having to paste into paint and save. Technically it should be the RS client Jagex makes, but they could be just using a IE dll. I fail to see how Chrome would be too much cpu usage; Firefox takes more in my experience.

[Gandalf14141]

Swiftkit, yo. Lets you take dem pics.

 

You can do that by pressing "Prnt Scrn" on your keyboard...

 

Swiftkit saves files instantly without having to paste into paint and save. Technically it should be the RS client Jagex makes, but they could be just using a IE dll. I fail to see how Chrome would be too much cpu usage; Firefox takes more in my experience.

 

Yea, I know, but some people may not want to go through the time to download Swiftkit. Nonetheless I'm happy to see someone else that thinks the RS Cliet should be the best.

[aspeeder]

Chrome is buggy in general especially with Java, I use firefox and it works fine.

[PereGrin]

I am currently using the Client, just got it today to test it out. It doesn't lag, and it seems to run pretty well.

[SoulWars]

Looking @ statistics, Chroms runs Java the best, IE worst... hmmm.

[Kimberly]

Swiftkit saves files instantly without having to paste into paint and save.

 

So does Gadwin Printscreen and it takes far less resources than that piece of crap.

 

Looking @ statistics, Chroms runs Java the best, IE worst... hmmm.

 

Are you sure that's not running Javascript the best? I thought Chrome was pretty bad for java-based programs.

[SoulWars]

^ wut?

[ruben1026]

ive used chrome before it runs fine on chrome it all depends on your pc. the rs client is the best with no doubt.

[Youmu]

You guys are forgetting that the RS client is IE-based. And we all know IE = crap.

 

Firefox is by far the most superior, because you can have the Game Bar with you at the same time, and switching tabs is far more efficient.

 

Not to mention it doesn't lag :3

[GlowinRedM]

If they open-sourced it using the IE DLL then we're all getting screwed.

[SoulWars]

I don't want personal preference, I want a conclusion and why. To me, it seems like it's either Chrome, Safari or MF

[Youmu]

Chrome has this annoying status bar that appears/disappears on its own. While it doesn't seem like much, my entire screen got blacked out by it before.

 

Not sure with Safari.

 

Firefox works fine for me, plus it's the only one out of the 3 that works with the Game Bar so that's the way to go.

[SoulWars]

Chrome has this annoying status bar that appears/disappears on its own. While it doesn't seem like much, my entire screen got blacked out by it before.

 

Not sure with Safari.

 

Firefox works fine for me, plus it's the only one out of the 3 that works with the Game Bar so that's the way to go.

There's a RuneScape extension for Google Chrome; it's much cleaner and better-looking than Jagex' failed Conduit-made-toolbar. Besides, using Google Chrome search engines, I get everything at my hands with a snap.

[All_Bogs]

Looking @ statistics, Chroms runs Java the best, IE worst... hmmm.

Are you sure that's not running Javascript the best? I thought Chrome was pretty bad for java-based programs.

 

Yeah, keep in mind that as confusing as it may sound, JavaScript and Java have fairly little to do with each other.

 

 

I ran a quick test using all options I have available here. I'd just boot up the game and leave it to run at the login screen with the animated background enabled. Highest graphical settings, no sound.

 

Internet Explorer surprisingly enough didn't even get to the point due to some bollocks Java error. The options screen said that Java was enabled but RS claimed that it wasn't.

 

As far as memory goes, the amount of memory used by the actual game seems to be identical across browsers. Chrome used about 150mb for the browser (chrome processes) and 200mb for the game (java[Caution: Executable File]). Firefox used around 70mb for the browser and 200mb for the game. The downloadable client used about 210mb total.

 

As far as CPU usage goes, it's hard to judge since it changes so much depending on what scene is shown. Overall, it seemed that the official client and Chrome were about equal in CPU usage, with Firefox' usage being a little bit below them.

 

That said, Chrome does have some annoying issues on F2P; whenever the advert changes it causes some whacky blinking and stuff. Might be 'cause I haven't updated for a while though :P (Edit: updated, still the same thing. Updated version does use a tad less memory though still more than FF)

[SoulWars]

Looking @ statistics, Chroms runs Java the best, IE worst... hmmm.

Are you sure that's not running Javascript the best? I thought Chrome was pretty bad for java-based programs.

 

Yeah, keep in mind that as confusing as it may sound, JavaScript and Java have fairly little to do with each other.

 

 

I ran a quick test using all options I have available here. I'd just boot up the game and leave it to run at the login screen with the animated background enabled. Highest graphical settings, no sound.

 

Internet Explorer surprisingly enough didn't even get to the point due to some bollocks Java error. The options screen said that Java was enabled but RS claimed that it wasn't.

 

As far as memory goes, the amount of memory used by the actual game seems to be identical across browsers. Chrome used about 150mb for the browser (chrome processes) and 200mb for the game (java[Caution: Executable File]). Firefox used around 70mb for the browser and 200mb for the game. The downloadable client used about 210mb total.

 

As far as CPU usage goes, it's hard to judge since it changes so much depending on what scene is shown. Overall, it seemed that the official client and Chrome were about equal in CPU usage, with Firefox' usage being a little bit below them.

 

That said, Chrome does have some annoying issues on F2P; whenever the advert changes it causes some whacky blinking and stuff. Might be 'cause I haven't updated for a while though :P

Hmm, quite interesting; have you tried Safari, though? Also, how do I know when I have to update Google? I thought it updated itself.

[All_Bogs]

The updating thing wasn't too clear to me, either. Quick search revealed some people mentioning the automatic silent update functionality, but that might have been related to older versions of it?

 

Google has this to say about it. Basically, hit the wrench icon and go to 'About Google Chrome'. In there you'll be told whether or not your version's up to date.

 

As for Safari, no idea. I doubt that a performance increase would be significant enough to use it solely for using RuneScape, and other than that there's really no reason to it. Hell, some people consider it to be worse than IE :-X

[SoulWars]

The updating thing wasn't too clear to me, either. Quick search revealed some people mentioning the automatic silent update functionality, but that might have been related to older versions of it?

 

Google has this to say about it. Basically, hit the wrench icon and go to 'About Google Chrome'. In there you'll be told whether or not your version's up to date.

 

As for Safari, no idea. I doubt that a performance increase would be significant enough to use it solely for using RuneScape, and other than that there's really no reason to it. Hell, some people consider it to be worse than IE :-X

Thanks for mentioning the 'About Google Chrome'-button, it seems like the silent update function belonged to the older versions... :wall: :thumbup:

[Hegelstad]

Chrome has this annoying status bar that appears/disappears on its own. While it doesn't seem like much, my entire screen got blacked out by it before.

 

Not sure with Safari.

 

Firefox works fine for me, plus it's the only one out of the 3 that works with the Game Bar so that's the way to go.

There's a RuneScape extension for Google Chrome; it's much cleaner and better-looking than Jagex' failed Conduit-made-toolbar. Besides, using Google Chrome search engines, I get everything at my hands with a snap.

 

This, theres no real reason to use firefox, chrome is far superior in java support, speed, security, design, and the runescape extension which is alot better than the official toolbar.

 

Chrome is not a memory hog as someone mentioned, it just uses more if there is available, if other programs need it it releases memory, this ensure that no memory or cpu power is wasted.

[Youmu]

That said, Chrome does have some annoying issues on F2P; whenever the advert changes it causes some whacky blinking and stuff. Might be 'cause I haven't updated for a while though :P (Edit: updated, still the same thing. Updated version does use a tad less memory though still more than FF)

Chrome still does the flashing thing when another advert loads :\ that's why I avoid Chrome basically.

[SoulWars]

That said, Chrome does have some annoying issues on F2P; whenever the advert changes it causes some whacky blinking and stuff. Might be 'cause I haven't updated for a while though :P (Edit: updated, still the same thing. Updated version does use a tad less memory though still more than FF)

Chrome still does the flashing thing when another advert loads :\ that's why I avoid Chrome basically.

Yeah, Chrome flashes sometimes (or at least did). I'm P2P, so I wouldn't know, currently... I think it also depends on your PC.