![]() (For instance, I get avg of 5.6 µs/req for ublock, and avg of 20.5 µs/req for tsurlfilter). With that in mind, uBO's blocking engine is currently the fastest as demonstrated by latest Cliqz's benchmarks, so the "quicker" claim does not hold either. AdBlocker Ultimate: 604 MB (+362 MB compared to no blocker)ĪdBlocker Ultimate is a extremely dubious fork of AdGuard, with a token GitHub repo where they recreate the repo from scratch regularly so as to disappear previous commit history.uBO: 300 MB (+58 MB compared to no blocker).Summing up all the memory used by page and extensions processes, I get: The Extensions process itself is ~36MB with uBO while it is ~113MB with AdBlocker Ultimate. ~16MB with uBO to ~31MB with AdBlocker Ultimate - these were lightweight web pages, expect larger gap for typical pages. Here: Īs seen in the screenshots, AdBlocker Ultimate causes web pages to consume nearly double in memory when compared to uBO, i.e. ![]() Found AdBlocker Ulimate quicker, lightweight and blocks more ads than uBlock Origin.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |