Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Adobe Flash Player 11 Linux Performance

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,648

    Default Adobe Flash Player 11 Linux Performance

    Phoronix: Adobe Flash Player 11 Linux Performance

    In the middle of July, Adobe released the first Flash Player 11 beta, which had updated the Linux version too. The Flash Player 11 release notably incorporated native 64-bit support, once again, after the earlier "Square" 64-bit beta had lagged behind in terms of updates. Shortly following the Flash Player 11 Beta 1 release I had carried out some Linux benchmarks, but those results never seemed to make it out the door. Here are those results for anyone interested in seeing how the CPU usage and system power consumption differ between Flash 11 with and without VDPAU rendering and then against the open-source Gnash Flash Player.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=16287

  2. #2

    Default

    Probably the reason for higher power consumption is that the Crash player doesn't use a hardware display method (VDPAU or OpenGL) to actually display the frames. This means that the CPU must copy them to system RAM, do whatever compositing it wants to do, and then copy the frame back to the GPU. This slows it down, increases CPU usage, and causes tearing.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,052

    Default

    With fglrx (HD 6550, i5 480m) flash 11 beta on 64 bit is totally unusable.

    I had tried both in /etc/adobe/mms.cfg: With and without
    Code:
    EnableLinuxHWVideoDecode=1
    OverrideGPUValidation = 1
    With flash 11 no difference whatsoever: CPU between 80-100% in normal mode and when putting to fullscreen the screen freezes often for several seconds (!!) and exiting fullscreen takes about 10 seconds.

    Now I use 10.3.181.34 with nspluginwrapper and it is much better. Without the entries in mms.cfg it is really bad, but fullscreen with them is actually really good in terms of cpu usage. Not as good as with a native player, of course, but that's the "best" videoplaying with flash I have ever seen.
    That said, that often doesn't apply to sites other than youtube. On videohosters like videobb even a paused flash video will produce ~80% cpu usage.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,485

    Default

    i'd like to see tests between older versions of flash

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    24

    Default how does it compare to 32 bit flash?

    one very important question is how the 64 bit flash compares to 32 bit flash on the same hardware.

    I upgraded to the 64 bit flash sometime last month, and it seemed to be smoother than the 32 bit version on my overloaded system, but how much of that is real improvement and how much is the placebo effect I don't know :-)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,175

    Default

    The 64-bit build of Beta 1 has several known performance regressions.

    Also, Beta 2 has just been released, not sure if the 64-bit performance is better now. Flash 11 is much faster for 32-bit systems though.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •