Vivaldi noticeably sluggish since upgrading to 3.0



  • I updated from 2.6 to 3.0 today and straight away noticed a slowdown in Vivaldi's operation. Not necessarily page loading, but the UI itself. It feels like the CPU's been swapped for a slower one. Several times I've pressed F8 and quickly started typing but the UI hasn't kept up and didn't overwrite the existing URL. Never happened before. If I do it slowly it works as normal. It feels sluggish in several other areas as well. Just wanted to ask if this is a known thing, before I take time to disable extensions, clear cache, etc. (and are they likely to help anyway?).


  • Moderator

    @rf10 said in Vivaldi noticeably sluggish since upgrading to 3.0:

    Just wanted to ask if this is a known thing, before I take time to disable extensions, clear cache, etc. (and are they likely to help anyway?).

    No such known issue internally. You may proceed with trying to find the source of the problem. Does it happen with a clean profile as well?



  • @mtaki14 I didn't know what a clean profile entailed so looked it up and haven't got the time right now or the risk appetite to do that. That was from a 2016 thread however, so it's possible there's a quick and safe way of doing it with new versions.



  • @rf10 Testing with a Ctrl-Shift-N window is a good first step.



  • I sent this in to the bug forum, but I noticed upon checking Task Manager numerous instances of running processes even whenn only one or two tabs is open. I hope this has been resolved but wondering if anyone else has noticed this?



  • @dxace1 said in Vivaldi noticeably sluggish since upgrading to 3.0:

    numerous instances of running processes even whenn only one or two tabs is open.

    Yes, you will always see a number of processes, if you use the Vivaldi task manager (Shift+ESC) you will see what these are. Browser, GPU, Network, Audio, App, and one for each extension and each panel you've opened in this session. This is normal.



  • @rseiler Great, thanks - everything works perfectly in a new window, a huge difference. Maybe it's the number of tabs I've got open or cache or something so I'll sort it out. Glad to see it's not Vivaldi's fault.



  • @rf10 I'm having the identical issues... Ever since I upgraded to 3.0 et al. (I tried 3.0.1874.33 just out today which updated from one of the first V 3.0 cuts a few days ago.) This report is spotty at best, so I expect if it continues, I will report better details later.
    WHILE I was editing this just now before, JUST before I posted this, I did notice that CPU for the whole V stack jumped to ~25% and stayed there for 10-20 seconds (as per graphs). (25% on this PC = 2 of 8 logical and 1 of 4 physical cores at 100%.)

    -> PC = Alienware MR-17 -- 16 GB ram -- SSD - 2k-x4k 17" NVidia 980 - Windows 10
    -> ANY V 3.0 version -- MANY windows and tabs (but IDENTICAL number, or less than when running V 2.x

    I've tried :

    • Opening a new tab on every open page, then hibernating all other tabs. So now I have NO windows with open tabs... But, just trying to open another tab, or a bookmark now takes 30 seconds.
    • Using "ITM" (Internal Task Manager for Viv) to ID any offending plugins, CPU / GPU.
    • Closed and reopened V numerous times --- Generally NOW, each time I reopen Viv, it takes almost 5 minutes to open all the windows and tabs.
    • Process Manager (SysInternals) shows
    • -- NOW, AT IDLE - 11 GB out of 16 GB Physical in use. CPU = 20-30% with Viv = 2-4% -- ITM - Internal Task Manager -- BROWSER = 20-40 -- GPU = 3-20
    • -- When SLOW?? I see tasks that seem simple, like opening a new tab, or switching to an existing tab, going to certain websites. Then, it SEEMS to be slower, and I see that when it becomes slow, it goes to, and STAYS at 25% CPU for the WHOLE branch -- seems like 5-35 seconds.

    I realize I have very little specific information on when it is running slow, HOW slow?, and what parts are specifically slow?
    I will try to report more when I have better details. For the MOMENT at least, I seem to have acceptable performance. (SEE NOTE in the first PARAG here, for more recent update).



  • @rf10 The notable difference with a private window in the area of performance is that it runs without extensions, unless you've configured a given extension to explicitly work with private windows, which you probably haven't. So I'd start thinking about one of those not liking 3.0.



  • @rseiler Interesting. A new private window runs fast, and a new non-private window runs noticeably slower. I'd never given thought to that before, thanks for bringing it up. (Mostly for my own reference) I'm using these extensions - will try disabling each one.
    uBlock Origin
    uBlock Origin Extra
    uBO-Scope
    Privacy Badger
    I Don't Care About Cookies
    HTTPS Everywhere
    Stylus



  • @rf10 I disabled all extensions and no noticeable difference. Opening a new tab (which here opens a tiny local HTML file) is essentially instant in a private window and takes about 0.7 seconds in a normal ones. Is there any other reason apart from extensions why there would be a difference?



  • @rf10 Interesting. Anyone have some thoughts on how that could be?

    I know private windows don't store searches, cookies, etc., but it's very unlikely any of that would have a bearing.



  • @rseiler said in Vivaldi noticeably sluggish since upgrading to 3.0:

    Anyone have some thoughts on how that could be?

    Could be a massive history backlog. Some users have reported slowness when saving history for ever. It would explain why private windows are fast, as they hold no history. Maybe a huge cookie jar would do it too, or a very large downloads list.



  • @Pathduck It could be tabs - I didn't realise I had over 800 open, although only a handful are active. History, downloads and cookies are all minimal. It'll take a long time to process them but I'll post back when it's done.



  • @rf10 First, how do you not realize such a thing visually? Also the startup time and the memory taken (lazy loading can only do so much).

    And it's not as if they're all closed just because you open a private window, but somehow a private window wasn't influenced by them anyway. Maybe it's more the number of tabs per window than overall resources consumed by the browser.

    But a more basic point: did you not have 800 right before you upgraded to 3.0? Why weren't they a problem then?



  • @rseiler I use the Window panel as my tab bar, and so when more than around 40 are open the only visual indicator is the length of the panel scrollbar. After 100-200, which can happen very quickly, it stops being a useful indicator.

    It's due to poor workflow and discipline. I have time to look individual things up but not to process them properly (read the page, make notes, take action, close the tab) and so they accumulate. It's caused problems in the past but after starting afresh I fell back into the pattern and don't know how to break it. Psychology 🙄.

    I'd guess something in 3.0 changed in a way that unintentionally lowers the threshold for when tab numbers start being a problem.



  • @rf10 OK, thanks for the further info.

    In the interest of trying to nail down what might not just be an isolated problem: I've been seeing something possibly identical as of 3.0, though it doesn't happen often (most sites tend not to trigger the problem). You didn't really say how often this happened to you overall with 3.0. Maybe not often? Or was it basically all the time?

    I don't know if you can still reproduce the problem, but did you happen to look at Task Manager when it was occurring? Was Vivaldi's CPU use spiking at those times? That is certainly the case here when it happens, and the internal task manager (Shift-ESC) goes to 100 for "Browser" (though note that the internal task manager will be frozen for a time when the problem is happening).

    And when the problem was happening, did you see a title bar appear at the top of Vivaldi (unusual in itself, since Vivaldi doesn't normally have one) saying "Not Responding"?

    I'm curious now if you still see the problem with fewer tabs. Way fewer. I have a crazy theory based on what you've said and what I've experienced: I don't think you need to be anywhere close to 800 tabs to see the issue. I can get it with around 10, though that's a very loose number.

    But here's the key: it doesn't happen in a new window, even if the other window has >10 tabs open (heck, you found this with 800, so this won't be surprising). But I don't mean a private window: just a new window (Ctrl+N) will be fine, which takes extensions out of the equation for good since they're still active with Ctrl+N.

    I really do think something is going on here, and your 800 might have been a red herring masking the real problem. Like you, I never experienced this before 3.0 short of hitting the rare bad site.

    Win10 (Insider), 16GB



  • The last couple builds, and this one in particular, have been not good to put it politely.

    I don't think I have ever had such a messed up set of updates as these, and I have been using Vivaldi and Opera before that since the days of paid Opera browser. * Side story, I remember the first time I installed Opera it was a bootleg copy of some type that bypassed the paid thing somehow. 👼

    I mean, how can you break a browser so bad that it brings a Intel 9600K literally to its knees. Not that this is a top of the line processor, but it should be able to deal with a web browser, shouldn't it? I am not even a real power user, I have maybe 10 tabs open at once, and most are fairly static pages. Youtube is so laggy that it is annoying to use, you can't even scroll comments. Watch a few videos and the browser barely responds. Other sites don't work, or won't render correctly, or just do unexpected things.

    Firefox, Chrome, and even Internet Explorer 11 seem to work when Vivaldi will not. And no, I am not going to install Opera or 5 other browsers to diagnose things, or want to switch between a dozen browsers just to get my work done. I am not particularly happy to even have Chrome on my system, but I have to say, it seems to work smoother and better than Vivaldi currently does.

    I haven't taken the time to report all these bugs, but there are probably 3-5 times a day where I have to switch browsers to make things work. Some of these I don't know what good it would do to report as they are things like banking, school learning sites, and similar that are password protected. I don't know how they would even be able to see the bug let alone fix it.

    I hope they get this sorted out soon, it feels like lots of attention is being paid to silly features while the core functionality gets worse every update. What good is a clock in the taskbar if you can't even use the browser after all.



  • @neonturbo
    Hi, the problem is it is not for every user only for a few.
    I use Vivaldi mainly on Linux but cross check those reports on Windows 10 Pro on different systems, i5 3570K for example.
    Vivaldi is absolute snappy, no lags.
    My old GTX 760 does not support all video codecs, VC9 is rendered on CPU, but my CPU never goes about 10 - 15 %.
    There can be many reasons why Vivaldi slows down but not Vivaldi.
    One user report he use 20000 bookmarks, it slows down Vivaldi to turtle.
    Some AV software blocks Vivaldi to crawl, and so forth.
    Updates increase Chromium version sometimes break Vivaldi on some systems.
    Check Vivaldi with a Guest Profile or private window to sort out extensions, for example.

    Cheers, mib



  • @mib2berlin

    My old GTX 760 does not support all video codecs, VC9 is rendered on CPU, but my CPU never goes about 10 - 15 %.

    My GTX 1660 supposedly supports VC9, and all other modern codecs according to the Nvidia chart posted elsewhere on this forum. My system is pretty up to date technologically, both hardware and software. there shouldn't be any reason to have these issues.

    There can be many reasons why Vivaldi slows down but not Vivaldi.

    In my experience, it IS only Vivaldi. Now to be fair I haven't installed other Chromium based browsers like Opera, but Chrome itself doesn't have all these bugs. Neither does Firefox, nor does the hopelessly outdated IE11. Vivaldi vs Chrome and Firefox should be a pretty fair comparison, they are Vivaldi's competition after all. People are going to compare these as they are the largest browsers out there right now.

    One user report he use 20000 bookmarks, it slows down Vivaldi to turtle.

    Nowhere near that many bookmarks here. Nor do I have many open tabs, maybe 8-10 at most. I also shut off pretty much everything like Speed Dial, tab animations, tab stacks, sidebars, and so on. I run pretty much a very stripped down no-feature version of Vivaldi.

    Some AV software blocks Vivaldi to crawl, and so forth.

    That is a fair point, you cannot control what extensions people install. However, the same slowdown happens with Vivaldi built-in adblocker. Also, I have all the same exact extensions in Firefox and Chrome without the slowdowns and lag. I also have all the exact same bookmarks between browsers, somewhat as a backup, and also it was easier to just bulk import/export between them. I use similar amounts of open tabs with the other browsers too. I have eliminated many variables here when testing.

    Check Vivaldi with a Guest Profile or private window to sort out extensions, for example.

    No better in a private window, or standalone installation of Vivaldi. In fact I have had worse Youtube lag in some cases using private windows. The other day I was watching old MTV music videos on Youtube, so nothing 4K by any means, and after probably 20 videos, the browser was nearly locked up.

    It is something with Vivaldi or maybe Chromium, but either way Vivaldi should be the one who is ultimately responsible for it.

    I have seen many on this forum blame Chromium for these bugs. As an end user, I have nothing to do with Chromium, or choosing to use it. Me blaming Chromium would be like blaming a particular farmer for a bad salad I purchased as a restaurant. The restaurant purchased the lettuce, checked the quality, assembled the salad, and even presumably ate it (tested it) at some point. Yet they still sold me wilted rotting lettuce.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.