mac vs. pc flash performance benchmark

[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

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]

Re: mac vs. pc flash performance benchmark

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 . 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

 

[Megaquad]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
if this were a committee and we had to make a report, this would be the conclusion . 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 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.

[edit] i have the latest plugin for flash. what about you, rower? [/edit]

 

[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

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?