Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's New 27-Inch iMacs Experiencing Performance Issues?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I just tried this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpBNr-oNT1g
on my new default browser, Firefox 3.5b1. In HD.
It plays pretty smoothly in Firefox, at full screen.
Then I tried it in Safari. Safari spins every few seconds, and the clip is pretty much unwatchable in HD.
This is on a Mac Book Pro 13", 2.53GHz, OS 10.6.1.
Safari definitely has a much more significant issue with Flash, than any other browser I've tried, both on Mac OS and Windows. I suppose the faithful will still keep blaming Adobe, though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpBNr-oNT1g
on my new default browser, Firefox 3.5b1. In HD.
It plays pretty smoothly in Firefox, at full screen.
Then I tried it in Safari. Safari spins every few seconds, and the clip is pretty much unwatchable in HD.
This is on a Mac Book Pro 13", 2.53GHz, OS 10.6.1.
Safari definitely has a much more significant issue with Flash, than any other browser I've tried, both on Mac OS and Windows. I suppose the faithful will still keep blaming Adobe, though.
I see that my points aren't coming across. Just carry on if you can't see or understand the utility of it.
Smooth as silk, running Safari in HD/full screen on a 24" iMac, 3.06Ghz, 4G RAM.
Beautiful HD footage, BTW.
Sure, if giving a classroom lecture or demo, but for use in a kitchen? This would seem a bit counter productive, as hands, which are often used
for food preparation and eating, would soil the monitor in no time at all. Now, if the monitor could be laid down flat and double as a kitchen range,
we might be onto something here.
My wife uses a Dell 12" laptop in the kitchen, and watches Hulu and listens to iTunes on it. However she generally washes her hands before messing with it.
Looks great using Safari on my iMac and MBP in HD. Not one problem. I am lucky to be able to see NASA launches from my yard. MC
Do we need to post those video links to the failed Windows 7 touch control demos again?
I've been considering one of these for my network once I get a N router running. No need to dedicate a TV tuner for each computer.
I don't know why you think anyone is hurt by your comments. This is nothing anyone hasn't heard before; it wasn't true then and it ain't true now. But go ahead and say it anyway, over and over and over and over; I'm sure it is excellent therapy for your condition.
You could try rolling back to regular leopard and see if that helps. It did on my end.
On SL, Firefox would occasionally stutter the playback of a youtube vid, while Safari would skip constantly or crash altogether. Rolling back on my macbook has resulted in minimal stuttering for both those browsers. I should see how Chrome handles it later.
Edit: ran that video in your link as HD and Safari had a seizure, even on 10.5.8.
On MacOS X, "100 percent CPU" means 100% of one core, so a new iMac using 4 cores fully will display "400 percent". On Windows, "100 percent CPU" means hundred percent of everything available, so the same iMac with Bootcamp using 4 cores fully will only display "100 percent".
"25 %" on Windows on a quad core CPU means one CPU is fully used.
If you look at flash videos, they seem to mostly be a flash wrapper with standard audio and video codecs like H264 or aac. It's the Adobe crankware that's letting the mac browser experience down. I'm getting an iPhone tomorrow and I won't miss flash at all apart from not being able to use surfthechannel.
Better to say
25%" on Windows on a quad core CPU means that the equivalent of one CPU is fully used
Unless you assign a task's affinity to one CPU, you'll see some activity on other CPUs, even if you only have one thread completely CPU bound.
Purists will think that's inefficient, but in fact the rate of process migration is slow enough that you need a carefully controlled experiment (or an carefully constructed edge case) to see a practical loss in performance. (And hard-locking affinity on a multi-tasking system is definitely not recommended.)
Bouncing around a few times a second seems a lot to a human, but to a chip capable of ten's of billions of operations a second it's very slow.
Having a late-08 MBP and recently upgrading (downgrading) to SL, I see nothing but terrible performance on sites heavy with flash. Both cores are max'd at 85-90% capacity, and at times I cannot switch windows, or even call up the 'Force Quit' dialog box. Not sure if it's Flash-centric or flash+safari since latest Firefox behaves around 50% capacity and I have system responsiveness.
Oh, btw, i end up having to kill/terminate everything else if I plan on accessing flash heavy sites so only thing running is Finder (well and other core OS services).
Not happy w/ SL - performance suxs, constant app crashes; finder randomly recycles - ready to toss the whole kit-n-caboodle out the door and go back to XP/Win7.
i'm running retail snow leopard on an asus p5w dh deluxe, with 4gb of ram, c2d 3ghz nvidia 9800gts, my benchmarks and user experience are FANTASTICALLY better than they were with leopard, i'm experiencing exactly 0 of the problems actual macs are, i love snow leopard, its actually the only thing left that apple makes that i don't hate, /me glares at the iphone.. i mean when i watch flash videos the cpu does spike over 100, but thats per core, so i don't think what i'm experiencing is insane or anything, it never gets choppy and always handles it
Weird. On an inferior laptop, the MacBook Alu 2 GHz, I had not a single hiccup with that video with Safari. Same goes for my "old" 2.33 GHz C2D iMac.
why is flash so bad on a mac?
my Asus notebook is 3 years old (f9s-b1) with a 2.4GHz Core2duo, HD videos on youtube only consume 20% of the CPU at most in either XP, vista or windows 7, it has never gone above that, playing 1080p Mov files in H264 the cpu never goes above 35%.
no frames are skipped, no lag, no jittering.
in linux same thing, never lags or jitters, im even able to play HD youtube videos on my dads old pentium m 1.6ghz although the cpu goes to about 95% (it is a single core after all)
some of you saying you have 3+GHz core2s or i7s get 100% CPU usage? something is obviously wrong
my Asus notebook is 3 years old (f9s-b1) with a 2.4GHz Core2duo, HD videos on youtube only consume 20% of the CPU at most in either XP, vista or windows 7, it has never gone above that, playing 1080p Mov files in H264 the cpu never goes above 35%.
no frames are skipped, no lag, no jittering.
in linux same thing, never lags or jitters, im even able to play HD youtube videos on my dads old pentium m 1.6ghz although the cpu goes to about 95% (it is a single core after all)
some of you saying you have 3+GHz core2s or i7s get 100% CPU usage? something is obviously wrong
as has been said. 100% CPU usage on a mac = 50% CPU usage on a dual core, or 25% usage on a quad core.
i'm running retail snow leopard on an asus p5w dh deluxe, with 4gb of ram, c2d 3ghz nvidia 9800gts, my benchmarks and user experience are FANTASTICALLY better than they were with leopard, i'm experiencing exactly 0 of the problems actual macs are, i love snow leopard, its actually the only thing left that apple makes that i don't hate, /me glares at the iphone.. i mean when i watch flash videos the cpu does spike over 100, but thats per core, so i don't think what i'm experiencing is insane or anything, it never gets choppy and always handles it
install ClickToFlash and watch this Youtube HD test video in H.264. i get 40-50% usage on a Core Duo.
as a comparison. my core duo hits 100% with HD movies without ClickToFlash
how u doing mate?
yeah that kicks my ass a little bit, not terrible tho, just stutters once, or twice, rebooted to leopard, doesn't stutter at all...tho it does rock the cpu pretty hard, and i think it's safe to say we've discovered why apple is hardcore against flash for the iphone, when everyone else will be getting it...
as a comparison. my core duo hits 100% with HD movies without ClickToFlash
how u doing mate?
herro
well it just goes to show how much better H.264 handles the CPU than flash. albeit not every video on Youtube is in H.264 as evident when some videos arent available on iPhone.
Some interesting observations here (iMac 2.93 ghz Core2Duo, 4G RAM, running only Safari and Activity Monitor). Viewing the YouTube HD test video mentioned above, I get (average):
Safari: 16%
Flash Player: 45%
If I view that video using the HTML5 viewer, I get:
Safari: 26%
I also tried Weezer's new music video, and got the following:
Safari: 19%
Flash Player: 46%
Viewing the Weezer video with the HTML5 viewer, I get:
Safari: 12%
Yes, you read that right: with the HTML5 video viewer not only does the Flash Player processor load disappear entirely, but the Safari processor load is reduced as well.
One would have to be delusional to not recognize the FUBAR that is Flash Player on OS X (and/or its implementation with Safari).
Safari: 16%
Flash Player: 45%
If I view that video using the HTML5 viewer, I get:
Safari: 26%
I also tried Weezer's new music video, and got the following:
Safari: 19%
Flash Player: 46%
Viewing the Weezer video with the HTML5 viewer, I get:
Safari: 12%
Yes, you read that right: with the HTML5 video viewer not only does the Flash Player processor load disappear entirely, but the Safari processor load is reduced as well.
One would have to be delusional to not recognize the FUBAR that is Flash Player on OS X (and/or its implementation with Safari).