µBlock, a lean and fast blocker

Test results, repeatable on a select group of websites, but the metrics are the same regardless, so the sample is small, but valid. These are full page load times after loading the superfetch and browser cache with 2 full loads prior to the test.

Admuncher (default + Facebook and Youtube Adblocker Extensions)
0.70
1.13
1.02
0.87
0.76
1.89
Total: 6.37 seconds for 6 pages.

Adguard (default)
0.58
1.88
2.33
1.03
0.97
3.21
Total: 10 seconds for 6 pages.

uBlock (default)
0.57
1.52
2.12
0.65
0.76
1.93
Total: 7.55 seconds for 6 pages.

As you can see from this sample, Adguard is substantially slower overall. But Admuncher shaves a full 1.18 seconds off of uBlock, which is enough to load 1-2 additional pages in the same time frame. We browse between 4,000-5,000 web pages a day in this home (25-50 clients). That means Admuncher will save a 'collective' 1.5 hours of browsing time for the household over Adguard. (factoring all of the clients combined, and all of the websites total). So as much as I hate to admit it, Admuncher is faster - all things considered - at least in my testing.

 

Your original statement was: "I went back to Adguard, and noticed a speed boost right away, so I will stick with that."

That's why I was skeptical. Now if you told me Admuncher was noticeably faster, my answer would rather have been: "Isn't Admuncher compiled code?"

I would say uBlock does pretty well given that out of the box it currently enforces 94,000 filters. It would be interesting to attach how many filters were enforced by the others as well.

 

I found out Adaptive QOS doesn't like uBlock for some reason, it was stalling. So the speed increase with Adguard came around the same time I disabled Adaptive QOS, and I had forgot I had disabled it.

But overall, Admuncher is the quickest in my testing.

 

I ran some more tests. I spent some time today trying to find 6 very intense, advertisement laden (30-100+ per page), along with some extensive scripts, and other elements on the pages. I ran the test again, this time I removed Adguard, and added Adblock into the mix. The method used was I executed a clean Chrome, opened the pages until loaded within each tab. Closed, then opened and loaded, then closed, and opened again. On the third time the benchmark was used. This allows 'sufficient' population of caches/fetches for each product.

Admuncher (Default+Youtube+Facebook Adblocker extensions)
4.03
3.38
4.95
1.87
1.76
1.07
Total: 17.05

Adblock (Default)
10.3
4.64
8.54
11.3
11.6
10.1
Total: 56.48

uBlock (Default)
5.50
2.18
5.96
2.39
1.64
2.66
Total: 20.33

Adblock seems to have totally failed in my view - slowing browsing to a crawl on these 'intense' pages. uBlock is very fast, no question about that, but Admuncher still slightly beats it. The reason for the Youtube/FB extensions was those are the only encrypted pages I consider filtration on, the rest I use would be financial, and private. Once I put the USG210 on my home network tonight, and activate the adblocking within the router I will retest, and see how it improves w/without any other product/extension supplementing it.

 

Ublock is the only extension I have been using on Chrome (Ubuntu 14.04).Is there any need to add Ghostery or Disconnect? And also I have been searching for Turkish adblock Filters and all I found is from year 2013 from Fanboy pages,that filter is not maintained

 

Admuncher is a page breaking monstrosity at work, but seems to function well enough at home.

I think I will switch to uBlock by default since the speed difference between the two is fairly meaningless (sub 1-5 second over 6 pages). It might be related to the lack of Gzip support in Admuncher causing broken pages - not sure. But uBlock I can reliability trust to generally not break pages, and still filter everything while keeping speeds up.

 

@ gorhill,
1) The name is it "µBlock" or "uBlock" ?
2) What is the meaning of "µ" / "u" ?

 

I take page damage very seriously.

I am not currently aware of ANY page damage.

If you would report this to me with all of the details I would need to duplicate it I will fix every single one.

You could do this via the Live chat option inside Ad Muncher on the Contact tab or via the CTRL + right click toolbar.

You could also post it to the appropriate board on our forum.

http://forum.admuncher.com/index.php

 

Jeff, this only happens at work. I think it's related to our extensive filtration at work. All web activity passes through multiple layers, and multiple scanning methodologies. Also SSL inspection is on, so the CA is our appliances at work, which can also break things. I don't fault Admuncher for this, it works perfectly at home. A LOT of pages don't load right with ANY adblocker at work, Admuncher just happens to take the short end of the stick at work.

While I cannot go into our specific security measures, I can just say they do break stuff at times. But these are serious security measures for a company that has virus lab, MSP, and other things. So it's considered essential for our operations to have deep inspection. (and page breaking ahahah)

 

Does disabling Ad Muncher make the page(s) suddenly work correctly?

 

Yes.

 

something has to be going on.

it should still work, regardless of what your work is doing.

Are you at work now?

Can you come to the chat room?

 

Home now. But remember all HTTP/HTTPS traffic is filtered through layers of inspection. I find it sometimes malforms pages even if I don't use an adblocker, but seems worse with AM.

If this helps - it seems like there is a 'delay', then I hit reload, and it sometimes works correctly.

 

being filtered through multiple layers shouldn't matter to Ad Muncher...unless they don't like what modifications Ad Muncher is making and one of those layers is choking...

still very strange.

 

I personally pronounce "youBlock" and I used the mu character just to emphasize the smaller footprint compared to big name blockers.

 

Thank you for the clarification.

 

@gorhill

Raymond,

What are you thoughts about providing three preset levels in uBlock with corresponding selected lists and default values for options.

1) Adblock
2) Adblock + Anti-tracking
3) Adblock + Anti-tracking + Security

The second option would also enable blocking of third party tags
The third option, also contains blocking of third party iframes (and possibly all third party scripts, allow only same domain scripts).

The current extension options can still be made available in tabs, just the first tab offers a simple explanation of the benefits (blocking third party Iframes enhances protection against XSS for example).

 

I would like to suggest the Prebake list: http://liamja.co.uk/Prebake/

 

I am scratching my head as to which category it would fit (I don't want to create a new one). Maybe regional?

 

Multipurpose?

BTW: If you add Prebake, you should also consider this one.

 

Could be under Regional...

 

I switched back to this on desktops. Wallenda's wire walk page was totally broken by Admuncher, and worked with this. Also since I have my UTM's filtering ads, I can turn most of this stuff off entirely, so I just keep a tiny database in uBlock checked, and it is very speedy, and catches anything the UTM's miss.

All good.. Nice app!

 

Fully agree!!!

This app is amazing...

Great work gorhill!

 

Could I get a link to that page please?