Vivaldi is good, but it needs serious optimization

Vivaldi looks like a very good browser. It has a lot of features and the most customization I've seen in a browser.

However, the reason it is impossible to use it is its resource consumption. It is REALLY slow compared to almost any current browser. Its ram and cpu consumption is even higher than chrome and it is impossible to use it on a laptop without it consuming all the battery.

Recently, I did a test between vivaldi and other browsers like edge, chrome, opera and brave. In the test I installed in all browsers the same extensions and opened the same pages as well (like youtube, reddit, google, twitter, pinterest, wikipedia, etc).

The result was that vivaldi consumed about 150mb - 200 mb more than the other browsers. In addition, it was too slow, while the other browsers were running smoothly.

The developers of vivaldi REALLY need to optimize this browser. All they do is add more and more stuff to the browser that slows it down.

I would like to use vivaldi as my main browser because of all the features it has and its customization, but it is just impossible.

14 thoughts on “Vivaldi is good, but it needs serious optimization”

  1. For my part, I have noticed that Vivaldi runs slower, but not that it requires more RAM.
    The startup time is certainly quite slow, although in the end Vivaldi doesn’t even start that much slower, because as soon as Vivaldi switches from the loading screen to the startup screen, it’s ready to go. The other Chromium based browsers, if you have the possible “keep browser open in background” option disabled, then the home screen shows up quickly, but still loads the rest of the stuff in the background.
    Recognizable, you can also try it, is when you open a website which is relatively data-heavy, then close the browser to open it again afterwards.
    But well, otherwise the Vivaldi browser seems rather sluggish in daily tasks compared to Brave, Firefox, Edge, etc.
    As for RAM usage, I noticed the opposite. Vivaldi uses slightly less than the competition. And with many tabs anyway less, because of the inbuilt tab hibernate feature.
    Regarding battery life, I did a non-professional test myself last week…. Tested Brave, Edge, Vivaldi and Firefox with the same add-ons, but with no new and therefore clean profiles, and had to realize that after a one hour usage actually all browsers consumed more or less the same amount of battery. All of them consumed around 15% per hour on my device. Where I also have to mention that on Brave I didn’t use some privacy add ons and on Vivaldi no tab hibernate add on, as these mentioned browsers already had/have these specific features built in.

    Ps. I recommend you, if you have a Vivaldi account, to post this post in the official Vivaldi forum. There the Vivaldi developers are very active, because otherwise they will never see this post or message.

  2. I do like vivaldi especially the sleek look and the level of updates, customization and what not. The only problem with vivaldi is performance.

    I do remember using it for quite some time and I typed the whole we address and address bar was completely blank. I had to wait for a couple of seconds to see it updated. I wish they’ll get this resolve and come out as a better browser

  3. What did you expect? The more features a browser has, the more bloated it gets, and therefore the slower it gets. If you really care about customisation, install Firefox and learn CSS.

  4. needs a lot of UX improvements, some would be just polishing existing features, some would be basically getting rid of issues inherited from chromium (blurry text and terrible extensions API are the most important ones on that list)

  5. I use Vivaldi daily, works very smooth for me. About 50-70 tabs open. RAM usage is very similar to other cheomium based browser, speed is also more or less the same. Maybe Edge seems little faster, but lacks many features.
    I like that Vivaldi is productivity oriented, so even it is slightly slower, its features make me work significantly faster than in any other browser.
    There is always room for improvement.

  6. Vivaldi mobile browser is another story altogether though. It’s pretty smooth although I’d like to see a big UX overhaul.

  7. The UI at least is expected to be a little slower than other browsers as Vivaldi’s whole UI that you see is implemented as a web page (which is how Vivaldi can have features that other Chromium-based browsers cannot), which is slower than native widget solutions in this case. Probably still room for optimization though.

  8. I use it on my cellphone and it works really well. I had it on my desktop PC, but as you said it consumed a lot of RAM and I only have 1 GB, so I switched to Opera.

  9. my first issue with vivaldi is UI/UX in both windows and android version, for example icons looks so dated and random. looks like they randomly downloaded those icons from internet because they are not in the same design at all.( specially on android)

    another issue is the way Tabs works for people like me with +2 monitors when you drag a tab to another monitor. its not working 90% of time and its annoying.

    obviously built-in adblocker is bad. in windows sure i can use ublock but what about android? there is a thing that you can add your custom filters but its not working. i reported this issue hundred times in years but not fixed.( also some of the default filter lists not working either).

    and yes vivaldi using more resource out of all other browsers that i used. and i don’t think that’s because of the amount of features it has, Edge also has lot of “useful” features (instead of useless email client, rss feed, calendar, …) and still ram/cpu usage is so good. Vivaldi is just not Optimized. i personally rather have better resource usage/smooth experience over customizability.

  10. Have you tried Otter Browser? Is it a spiritual successor to classic Opera and it is very lightweight, being based on Qt Webkit.

    Or try Firefox, which is very customizable using CSS, see /r/FirefoxCSS.

  11. I was using Vivaldi for all the same reasons (until I encountered a really bad bug), but after settling on Firefox realized I don’t need all those features at all the time (when I do, I can enable specific add-ons) and it is pretty customizable via CSS (despite looking kind of bad out of the box). Also… *much* faster as you say. Just a personal anecdote, I agree that they should focus on speeding it up – I do remember though that at 3.7 update they actually made it speedier.


Leave a Comment