Ars Technica recently had an article comparing Adobe Flash Player  
versions 9 & 10. They covered a lot of territory for both PCs and  
Macs, but their only Mac benchmarks were for Intel Macs. I posted a  
request for PPC benchmarks, and low and behold, they were produced. It  
appears the new Flash 10 is both slower and more resource intensive  
than the older Flash 9, so those of you who haven't upgraded may want  
to consider these results before taking the plunge. I upgraded on my  
dual G5 and noticed a slight slowdown, and also some flash videos now  
longer automatically play, which may be a good thing? I tried many of  
the betas for v.10 and virtually none worked on my G5. I was expecting  
total failure, and was pleasantly surprised that I didn't need to  
uninstall v.10 immediately and reinstall v. 9. Here are the benchmark  
results for PPC Flash Player:

from:patrthomA†aolD0†com
quote:
Originally posted by ktilford
I'd like to see some Mac OS X PPC test results in addition to Intel.

 From your lips...
(I sent these results in to Ars, but received no response. I assume  
they've been lost on someone's desk, so I'm reposting them here)

Because not everyone out there has an Intel Macintosh, and also  
because not everyone has a Core Image-savvy GPU, I ran the same Flash  
benchmarks under both 10.4.11 and 10.5.5 (both fully patched before  
testing) on a MDD Dual 1.0GHz G4 with 2GB RAM and the 128MB AGP  
GeForce Ti4600 installed. Dashboard was disabled for all tests. Here  
are the results:

Notes:
-Results listed are for Tiger, with Leopard results for the same test  
following in parentheses.
-CPU usage figures are listed as reported by Activity Monitor for  
Safari's process and then halved (to match how Activity Monitor  
reports Intel dual-core CPUs, so "50" actually means "Maxed one core  
out at 100%").
-Monitor depth was set to Millions (to enable Quartz Extreme).
-I regret that I own neither an ATI 9600 nor 9800 Radeon to test  
whether Core Image support would make any additional difference  
(though I suspect it might).

Flash 9.0.124.0
-GUIMark: 6.24 FPS, 50 percent CPU (5.81/50)
-Hulu: 36 percent CPU (36)
-YouTube: 37 percent CPU (37)
-2advanced: 32 percent CPU, peaking at 52 (19/54)
-Winterbells: 35 percent CPU, peaking at 46 (35/42)

Flash 10.0.12.36
-GUIMark: 6.25 FPS, 50 CPU (5.9/50)
-Hulu: 57 percent CPU (57)
-YouTube: 59 percent CPU (56)
-2advanced: 52 percent CPU, peaking at 78 (45/67)
-Winterbells: 59 percent CPU, peaking at 64 (56/59)

Interestingly enough, Activity Monitor also reports that v10 runs with  
a couple more threads than v9. Judging by these results, I think it is  
reasonable to say that owners of PPC Macs (Pre-G5, at least, and  
especially single-processor models) should stick with Flash Player 9  
unless they absolutely require the additional features provided by  
Flash Player 10. I personally find this annoying, since Adobe promised  
that v10 would have improvements/optimizations "...even for users of  
PPC Macs."

--Patrick

Note: Permission is hereby granted to publish, reformat and/or  
reproduce the above data so long as the data themselves are presented  
unaltered and in their entirety. Feel free to reformat 'em into a nice  
table or something, though.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a 
group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on 
Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette 
guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to