Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Adobe Flash Player 11 Linux Performance

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,093

    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
    1,376

    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
    2,155

    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.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1

    Default HTML5 Video Comparison

    I'd like to see a comparison between YouTube's Flash player and YouTube's HTML5 player in Firefox. Yes, it will be VP8 and Vorbis in the HTML5 player as opposed to H.264 and AAC so it's not strictly an apples to apples comparison, but it would nevertheless be interesting to see how different the HTML5 player is in CPU usage and power draw.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by d2kx View Post
    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.
    Nope, still completely useless for fullscreen.

    I think with the CPU time the flashplugin has used displaying absolutely nothing or a frozen screen the NASA could have been flying several times to the moon by now.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    458

    Default

    Yeah, I've noticed the plugin is a bit buggier than previous versions. To be expected with a pre-release version, but it is pretty bad. Some content doesn't play at all, and most interactive content plays with bugs in rendering.

    It's definitely more efficient, though. Videos that used to slow down or skip when switching to full-screen will now usually play smoothly during the transition, and some games which were slow now play better.

    (^^^ I think this was with 11 beta 1, not sure...)

    It'd be nice if there was a newer version of Lightspark available for Fedora, so I could test it. I know it's not on par with Adobe's Flash plugin, but it'd work well enough for my limited usage.
    Last edited by Nobu; 08-10-2011 at 07:46 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    Nope, still completely useless for fullscreen.

    I think with the CPU time the flashplugin has used displaying absolutely nothing or a frozen screen the NASA could have been flying several times to the moon by now.
    Fullscreen works fine for me with flash 10.3 and 11 beta 1/2. The only release it was broken for me was the 10.2 square releases.

Posting Permissions

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