Re: Mulberry-discuss Digest, Vol 86, Issue 8

On 4/20/2015 1:18 PM, David Gessel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Another quantitative measure of the difference is CPU time.  While the 
> measurements are relative only to each other, both clients are connected to 
> the same server and TB has used 1:43:33 of total CPU time while Mulberry 
> has used 0:02:47 - thunderbird has used 107x the CPU that mulberry has to 
> accomplish the same task (as reported by Process Hacker on my computer, 
> YMMV).
> 
> So when people complain about Tbird being "slower" or other allusions to 
> performance issues, 20x the memory and 107x the CPU usage is probably a 
> contributor to that assessment, especially on older hardware.

Wow! That is quite a difference. I'd be curious if those numbers hold up
on multiple different systems (I'll try to remember to test this and
reply back to this thread when I have time to play with Mulberry). I've
sure never claimed TB was 'lightning fast', but it certainly is
perfectly acceptable performance, especially considering the number of
IMAP accounts and amount of mail I have...