mac vs. pc flash performance benchmark

[Megaquad]

please check out this flash performance benchmark i made in 20 mins, mainly so i can measure performance of flash between macs and PC's

http://www.lcarsplanet.com/benchmx

if you are on mac, please use Safari, version 60 or greater
these are some results:

imac 350 mhz - 136
powerbook 1ghz - 309

please post your results, especialy PC users!!

[beatle888]

tibook 667


185 (first run)

205 (page already in cache)

207 (cleared cache but still got a higher score)

[LethalWolfe]

Score: 360 (371 if I run again w/o clearing cache)

rig:
P3 800 running Win2k and IE 6


Lethal

[shadowfax0]

P4 @ 2GHz
1 GB RAM
32 MB Graphics card
Running IE 6 - 460

iMac (17" flat panel) @ 800 MHz G4
1 GB RAM
32 MB Graphics card
Running Safari - 207

But I always seem to get much more done on my iMac :D

[edesignuk]

Mac
Browser: Safari V62
Hardware: DP1Ghz QuickSilver w/1Gb SDRAM
OS: 10.2.4
Score: 319

PC
Browser: IE 6.0
Hardware: 1.4Ghz AMD Athlon w/512Mb DDR RAM
OS: XP Pro SP1
Score: 258

[Megaquad]

Originally posted by LethalWolfe
Score: 360 (371 if I run again w/o clearing cache)

rig:
P3 800 running Win2k and IE 6


Lethal
damn :D
I guess flash player for mac is slower.. or macs are slower lol

I'll do OS 9 test later to see if it makes any difference

edit: okay its not so bad now that i see these other posts

[MacsRgr8]

Dual G4 1.25 GHz (1 GB RAM, Mac OS X 10.2.4):
Safari (v 62) 1st run: 408
Safari (v 62) 2nd run: 416
IE 1st run: 275
IE 2nd run: 280

P3 800 MHz (384 MB RAM, Win 2K):
IE 6: 1st run: 280
IE 6: 2nd run: 295

G4 500 MHz (1 GB RAM, Mac OS 9.2.2)
IE 5: 1st run: 241
IE 5: 2nd run: 243
Netscape 4.8 1st run: 240
netscape 4.8 2nd run: 249

[Wes]

Powermac Dual Ghz MDD, 768 megs (not that it would matter on a small flash file): 326

[Choppaface]

how does this test work?
you should also try moving and fading large bitmaps across the screen too...

dual athlon 1900+, gf4 ti 4400 win XP, IE6: 480
(note that IE only uses one of the processors)

if it's worth anything for interbrowser comparisons, I only get 190 in OSX/IE5 on my dual 500 G4 (ug!)

[filipp]

Score: 287
on a P3 733 w/ 384mb ram, XPP

/ filipp

[Megaquad]

Originally posted by Choppaface
how does this test work?
you should also try moving and fading large bitmaps across the screen too...

that test is basically measuring how much frames can computer render in 8.5 secs long interval
i doubt bitmaps and such would matter because flash treats everything as vector graphics..
but anyway, i'll improve it a lot in next version.
edit: i updated benchmark a bit, fixed bugs etc.

[tjwett]

i'm using latest Jag w/latest Safari on a 733 Quicksilver G4 with 1.5 gigs RAM.

first run: 88 !!??!!
cached: 178

am i crazy, or is this a lame score?

[Maclicious]

1st run: 115
2nd run: 118
3rd run: 120

Safari

machine, see below

[vniow]

224 using Phoenix on a 667Mhz PIII.

[Rower_CPU]

TiBook 1 GHz w/ 1GB RAM:

Chimera: 220
Safari:222

Running lots of stuff in the background though...

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
TiBook 1 GHz w/ 1GB RAM:

Chimera: 220
Safari:222

Running lots of stuff in the background though...

that sounds about right. i got 225 with a few apps in the BG, and 309 with just safari running.

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Megaquad
please check out this flash performance benchmark i made in 20 mins, mainly so i can measure performance of flash between macs and PC's

http://www.lcarsplanet.com/benchmx

if you are on mac, please use Safari, version 60 or greater
these are some results:

imac 350 mhz - 136
powerbook 1ghz - 309

please post your results, especialy PC users!!

Hardware: 2GHz P4, overclocked to 2.4GHz. 512MB DDR (319Mhz). 64MB Geforce4 Ti4200

Software: XP Pro SP-1, IE 6.0 SP-1

Test 1: 535
Test 2: 542
Test 3: 536

[shadowfax]

ugh, curse macromedia for making crappy mac ports.

that was my first sentiment, but then i thought, well, it's not like it's slow or anything on a mac. and how often do i look at flash stuff, anyway?

[MacBandit]

Dual/GHz/DDR Powermac 1GB DDR333.

Safari 354
IE 246
Chimera 242

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Dual/GHz/DDR Powermac 1GB DDR333.

Safari 354
IE 246
Chimera 242

holy crap. do you think that chimera limits flash somehow? i got the exact same score on it with nothing running (and a lot of stuff running too), on my Ti/GHz/GB RAM.

i want to see more chimera scores.

[Rower_CPU]

Hmmm...just retested with everything else closed and after logging out/in.

Safari ~ 285
Chimera ~ 220

The plot thickens...

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Hmmm...just retested with everything else closed and after logging out/in.

Safari ~ 285
Chimera ~ 220

The plot thickens...

did you run macjanitor or
"sudo sh /etc/weekly"
from terminal, before? it really clears up my RAM, even better than logout/login.

[Rower_CPU]

I just ran sh and tried again...same results.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
I just ran sh and tried again...same results.
weird. i guess the plot does thicken. but then, you have to ask, does it really matter? it's flash:D :rolleyes:

[pnz999]

BenchMX v1.0b1

First Run 460 (8517)

WinXP Pro, IE 6.0.2xx, Intel P4 2.8 GHz, ATI 9700 Pro

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
weird. i guess the plot does thicken. but then, you have to ask, does it really matter? it's flash:D :rolleyes:

Well, I can see framerate being important for interactive pages with lots of motion. FPS gamers rely on high framerates to get the best performance and playing experience.

For a non-interactive, animation framerate is less of an issue.

[SBG88]

iMac 800/768ram = 188 Safari


PC 1ghz athlon/256ram =261 IE6

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Megaquad
please check out this flash performance benchmark i made in 20 mins, mainly so i can measure performance of flash between macs and PC's

http://www.lcarsplanet.com/benchmx

if you are on mac, please use Safari, version 60 or greater
these are some results:

imac 350 mhz - 136
powerbook 1ghz - 309

please post your results, especialy PC users!!

System 1GHz iMac, 1GB DDR*
Software OS X 10.2.4, Safari v60

Test 1: 264
Test 2: 269
Test 3: 267

Software IE:mac

Test 1: 197
Test 2: 197
Test 3: 195

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by SBG88
PC 1ghz athlon/256ram =261 IE6

Interesting...similar scores between a 1GHz G4 and 1GHz Athlon...

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Interesting...similar scores between a 1GHz G4 and 1GHz Athlon...

Yet a P3 800 outperforms them. What weird results. I would have to say that this is all non conclusive and pretty much unreliable. More to the point someone should ask why. Does anyone care as long as flash plays smoothly?

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Yet a P3 800 outperforms them. What weird results. I would have to say that this is all non conclusive and pretty much unreliable. More to the point someone should ask why. Does anyone care as long as flash plays smoothly?

if this were a committee and we had to make a report, this would be the conclusion:D . this is what i was saying, sort of. it's just flash; it runs fine; does it matter? Flash doesn't seem to depend on CPU power (completely anyhow). it looks like the browser, the flash version (no one has even checked this), and god knows what else must be having pretty a pretty dramatic randomizing effect on these scores.

[FredAkbar]

iMac 1GHz
768 MB of RAM
OS 10.2.4
Safari v62
...........
score = 239

--Fred

[Mr. Anderson]

Very interesting -

133 on a Sawtooth 450 - I'll do my other machines later. But you sould try doing other things than throwing text around. I've noticed that a few simple 'tweens can slow my machine down where my one at work, a dual 1.25 doesn't even blink.

I'd put a couple 'tweens in of both motion and shape. And some math functions in ActionScript.

But great job and I can see it being ver useful. Let me know when you update it.

D :D

[Megaquad]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
if this were a committee and we had to make a report, this would be the conclusion:D . this is what i was saying, sort of. it's just flash; it runs fine; does it matter? Flash doesn't seem to depend on CPU power (completely anyhow). it looks like the browser, the flash version (no one has even checked this), and god knows what else must be having pretty a pretty dramatic randomizing effect on these scores.

Flash DEPENDS on CPU power and only, on CPU power. It is only possible that somehow, these Pentiums3 can render text very fast, faster than other processors.
It is known that Pentium3 is one of fastest processors, faster than P4 at the same clock or maybe, Flash Player has been optimized for it.
anyway.. i'll add more animations and stuff in next version.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Megaquad
Flash DEPENDS on CPU power and only, on CPU power. Nothing can "randomize" these results and they are accurate.
It is known that Pentium 3 is one of fastest processors, faster than P4 at the same clock and it is possible that P3 processor is very good at operations used in flash. Or, Flash Player has been optimized for it.

so how do you explain the discrepancies between browsers and G4 processors in this thread? like how Rower has the same computer as me but it doesn't perform the same?

[Megaquad]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
so how do you explain the discrepancies between browsers and G4 processors in this thread? like how Rower has the same computer as me but it doesn't perform the same?
you try running again, i made slight bugfixes and update yesterday that might be causing the difference, or he has older flash plug in

differences between browsers.. hmm isnt it too obvious? some browsers run flash slower some faster, speed safari v60+ in flash is equal to speed of standalone flash player.

remember pre v60 safari builds? flash was stuck running on like 5 fps

so far, scores between different macs were pretty as expected, i wonder if someone with ibook 800 could post, because ibook would probably be much faster than g4 on same clock

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Megaquad
you try running again, i made slight bugfixes and update yesterday that might be causing the difference, or he has older flash plug in

differences between browsers.. hmm isnt it too obvious? some browsers run flash slower some faster, speed of chimera and safari v60+ in flash is equal to speed of standalone flash player.

remember pre v60 safari builds? flash was stuck running on like 5 fps

so it's not just CPU:p it's browsers too. i am consistently getting 310-312 as of right now, running v62. rower got 285, nearly 30 points less, on the same box with (prolly) v60/62.

it's also interesting to see that DPs aren't doing too much better.

i have the latest plugin for flash. what about you, rower?

[Megaquad]

WIN XP, AMD 1100 - 323
imac 350 mhz under OS9 - 140

I just got another idea.. just like test runs a bit faster on OS9, perhaps it runs faster on w2k, or w98 than lets say win xp.. win xp probably has more background processes etc.

[iJon]

Dual 1.25 safari .62 - 417
p4 2ghz ie6 - 541
p4 2gha mozilla - 408

iJon

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by iJon
Dual 1.25 safari .62 - 417
p4 2ghz ie6 - 541
p4 2gha mozilla - 408

iJon

it sure seems that flash runs much better on IE/safari than mozilla-based browsers. do you suppose that is mozilla's fault or macromedia's?

anyone got omniweb in here to test?

[iJon]

Dual 1.25 w/ Omniweb 4.2- 381

iJon

[moby1]

318

TiBook 1GHz 512 RAM
Safari 1.0 V60

[Megaquad]

http://www.lcarsplanet.com/benchmx/alpha/

Check out alpha version of beta2 i'm working on :)
I added random/multiple color circles generator and I'll add some more stuff later.
So please dont post results its just a preview..
I'll add database of results too.

[SBG88]

iBook 800/640ram = 136 Safari second run

1st run was 118

10.2.4

[iJon]

Alpha 2

Dual 1.25 Safari .62 - 208
Dual 1.25 Omni Web- 250

P4 2ghz IE6 - 270
P4 2ghz Mozilla - 231

These are scores based on 2nd Runs

iJon

[topicolo]

Sweet! Duron 700Mhz 512mb DDR Ram running IE 6.0 SP1:

494!!!

[iJon]

Originally posted by topicolo
Sweet! Duron 700Mhz 512mb DDR Ram running IE 6.0 SP1:

494!!!
you didnt do his latest test did you, i mean a duron with 494???? something doesnt seem right.

iJon

[Rower_CPU]

OK, double-checked Flash plug-in version and here's the results:

Safari (v60) - 280-290
Chimera - 220
IE - 200-210

System:
PowerBook G4 1GHz
1GB RAM
Airport connection

[shadowfax]

beta 2, PBG4 1GHz 1GB RAM:
safari v62 - 206

Chimera 0.6, nearly latest nightly - 125

latest flash player.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
OK, double-checked Flash plug-in version and here's the results:

Safari (v60) - 280-290
Chimera - 220
IE - 200-210

System:
PowerBook G4 1GHz
1GB RAM
Airport connection

was that on the first test or the second, rower?

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
was that on the first test or the second, rower?

The original one. He said the new one is just a preview, not to be meant for testing.

[Dont Hurt Me]

im not running jag so no safari for me but with all these test you guys have done i think this is another example of how mac hardware is really behind the windows world. thought i would throw in these marks though nothing to do with flash so please no flames and thanks for the tests.

[Megaquad]

I updated benchmark!!
http://www.lcarsplanet.com/benchmx

check it out now, it is completely different, it doesnt measure text rendering speed anymore, all random shapes and coded shapes

you can still find old version here
http://www.lcarsplanet.com/benchmx/old

i get score 54 on safari v60 with this new version
-------
note: this is the last time i am updating testing core of flash benchmark, score is not "compatible" with that old version but all upcoming versions will be compatible from now

[iJon]

Dual 1.25 Safari .62- 203
Dual 1.25 Omniweb 4.2 - 191

P4 2ghz IE6- 270
P4 2ghz Mozilla - 198

This was on A2 and all scores are from a 2nd run

iJon

[Dont Hurt Me]

What the heck ran it on I.E
733 bumped to 800
1 gig ram
os 10.1.5
157

[Megaquad]

i updated it a bit: score now says 'Score: XX frames rendered' to avoid confusion (clear cache if you cant see it)

amd 1800+ - 201 frames rendered
amd 2200+ - 216 frames (it had some apps opened)

[shadowfax]

lol, megaquad; you need to hurry up and put out a final--i'm getting sick of closing chimera and all my apps to test safari :p.

136 in Safari v 62 on my TiG4/1Ghz/1GB
sorry for saying v64 originally, just a typo:rolleyes:

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
lol, megaquad; you need to hurry up and put out a final--i'm getting sick of closing chimera and all my apps to test safari :p.

136 in Safari v 62 on my TiG4/1Ghz/1GB
sorry for saying v64 originally, just a typo:rolleyes:

I think I see why we're getting different rates, Shadowfax (love the name, BTW - LOTR rocks).

I'm using v60, whereas you're on v62...

I'm getting about 125 frames now.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
I think I see why we're getting different rates, Shadowfax (love the name, BTW - LOTR rocks).
thanks! sorry to bore you, but (real fast) storytime!
my grandfather is a cool ret. technician who worked in Los Alamos (all kinds of cool stories about fusion energy testing &c); he's always built his own PCs, and he built my very first computer. he would always name his "my computer" and the network name "Gandalf." so i called mine "Shadowfax" (Ganfalf's horse) when i got it... and i have called all my computers that since then. then i just started using it as a nickname, i guess. On my mac, the computer name is shadowfax, and my username is "mithrandir" (gandalf's elvish name). lol, that's that, and this probably belongs in the geek thread:rolleyes:

I'm using v60, whereas you're on v62...

I'm getting about 125 frames now.
interesting. i guess 2 builds can really make a difference--though it really wasn't that significant. another problem solved, hehe.

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
im not running jag so no safari for me but with all these test you guys have done i think this is another example of how mac hardware is really behind the windows world. thought i would throw in these marks though nothing to do with flash so please no flames and thanks for the tests.

This is true, but raw performance isn't everything. Quartz extreme makes much of the UI faster and more stable in OS X. I see default icons in XP routinely, haven't and don't even know if that's possible in OS X.

Firewire with my iPod is noticeably faster, I'd say 25%. That's software, but it's fact.

I'm not excusing Apple hardware, it is waaay behind for the price you pay. But it's not quite as bad as it seems on paper. If the gap continues to widen of course....

[Megaquad]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
lol, megaquad; you need to hurry up and put out a final--i'm getting sick of closing chimera and all my apps to test safari :p.
since a2, you dont need to test again anymore, even if new version comes out you dont need to test it again because testing core will remain the same

You mentioned Quartz, well this old test measures text rendering speed and depends on graphics card a bit..i think that explains why some computers got very big score on it
www.lcarsplanet.com/benchmx/old

[Megaquad]

Athlon 1800 - 294 frames rendered
Duron_@ 933 MHz - 204 frames rendered
240 - Pentium 4 1.7 GHz

now I don't know if they had opened interfering apps running and i have yet to investigate effect of graphics card on score

[thebt]

On a Dual 450 PowerMac G4 I get:

Netscape 7: 76
IE 5: 64
Safari: 83

Ok, I also tested it on Virtual PC with Windows 2000

In IE 6: 78 !!!

So it's faster on Virtual PC than on my mac, except in Safari!!!!! :D

How can that be!?! :confused:

[Megaquad]

Originally posted by thebt
On a Dual 450 PowerMac G4 I get:

Netscape 7: 76
IE 5: 64
Safari: 83

Ok, I also tested it on Virtual PC with Windows 2000

In IE 6: 78 !!!

So it's faster on Virtual PC than on my mac, except in Safari!!!!! :D

How can that be!?! :confused:
okay i have 2 theories :)
1.flash player in vpc "jumps" through flash player movie without rendering every frame of it corectly so..
2.flash player for pc is A LOT better and VPC uses your 2 processors well
dunno.. :confused:

[MacBandit]

Dual/GHz/DDR PowerMac

Test A2
Safari = 158

[Mr. Anderson]

My dual 1.25 at work - 209

Nice little test you got there! :D

D

[Remus]

222 on a 2 GHZ P-4 512MB DDR Win XP IE 6 I will test my mac when I get home today...

[Megaquad]

I just found out that on a PC, score depends on graphics card a lot.
Some guy put rage128 vs. geforce 3 ti on a same machine, and difference was around 150 frames!

Now, it would be nice to know if Flash Player on mac depends on graphics..
So, does anyone have 2 macs running at same clock but with different graphics cards?

[agreenster]

I dont know if this has been posted yet but.....

Safari for the Mac didnt originally use Flash Player. It used Quicktime, which is only Flash 4 compatible! Thats why some of your results are slower. This has been fixed.

Do the test again with the latest Safari to get accurate results.

However, Flash player is a horrible tool for benchmarks. Its so flighty, you'll often get wacky playback speeds. It also depends on how the Flash movie is exported as to how it plays back.

[Megaquad]

Quicktime.. I dont think so, I've tried flash 6 content in older versions of Safari and they run fine, and when you right clicked on flash content it had standard flash player menu.

[mgargan1]

i got 39 with my P3 500, and 266 with my P4 1.9Ghz

[mgargan1]

i just oc'd my P3 to 560Mhz, and the frame rate went to 44... haha

[ouketii]

athlon xp 1900
512mb ddr

mozilla: 180
IE6: 270
Opera7: 147

[Megaquad]

Originally posted by mgargan1
i just oc'd my P3 to 560Mhz, and the frame rate went to 44... haha
What graphics card do you have in it?

[shadowfax]

well, i got safari v64 :cool:

slightly better performance on the test.

i went from 136 in v62 to 138 in v64. so it's negligible.

[ewinemiller]

With the updated version

133 fps on a 933 PIII Coppermine

171 fps on a 1ghz PIII Tualatin

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
well, i got safari v64 :cool:

slightly better performance on the test.

i went from 136 in v62 to 138 in v64. so it's negligible.

What about the difference between v60 and v62 or v64?

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacBandit
What about the difference between v60 and v62 or v64?

Rower has identical specs to my computer, and was running V60 awhile ago when he did the tests.

he got 280-290 (v60) to my 309 (v62) on the 1st test when we finally both had the same plugin, and i think Rower said he was getting about 125 on the second one, but that was probably with v62.

[Rower_CPU]

I used v60 on all of them. I haven't bothered to try to grab v62/4 yet...

[Mr. Anderson]

So I just tried the flash benchmarker on my dual 1.25 with the old Safari (60) and the new one and there really wasn't any difference. 83-86 for both on several runs.

D

[FelixDerKater]

32 frames????
That is lousy...

I was running Safari v.73 with Folding@Home running in the background, along with iTunes, AIM, and Entourage open.

[XnavxeMiyyep]

I only got 66 fps (8561) on my DP 867 G4 with 768 MB of RAM. 32 MB video card. OS X 10.2.5