Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Resources used compared to SpeedyFox #5

Open
ags1234 opened this issue Nov 11, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Resources used compared to SpeedyFox #5

ags1234 opened this issue Nov 11, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@ags1234
Copy link

ags1234 commented Nov 11, 2023

I use SpeedyFox since forever and I am happy with it because it is just one small file and it is portable.
I just tried Arctic Profile Optimizer and noticed it's size on disk is 10 times greater than that of SpeedyFox'.
Also, Arctic Profile Optimizer uses 39 MiB of RAM and SpeedyFox uses 2.7.

So in all fairness I am just asking: why achieve almost the same thing but grab more than 10 times the resources?
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@ags1234