Man, is flash broken (again?) or what? It was working before the upgrade to flash-10, but now cnn videos are very choppy when they play, or simply don't play at all. Do other people have this problem? I have a hyperthreaded 2.8GHz processor and cnn video takes some 70% on each thread. Prior to the update I would see some 30-40% (as far as I can recall), and only on one of the threads, not both.
Video on other sites plays well though, e.g. uefa.com.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Amadeus W.M. amadeus84@verizon.net wrote:
Man, is flash broken (again?) or what? It was working before the upgrade to flash-10, but now cnn videos are very choppy when they play, or simply don't play at all. Do other people have this problem? I have a hyperthreaded 2.8GHz processor and cnn video takes some 70% on each thread. Prior to the update I would see some 30-40% (as far as I can recall), and only on one of the threads, not both.
Video on other sites plays well though, e.g. uefa.com.
I didn't find anything helpful with a quick Google search for "flash 10 multitheaded" but maybe it is an issue with multi-core machines? In contrast, on my single core machine, hulu movies seem to take significantly less CPU, at least with my "seat of the pants" benchmarking. Maybe 15-25% less...
Richard
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:10:57 -0500 Richard Shaw hobbes1069@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't find anything helpful with a quick Google search for "flash 10 multitheaded" but maybe it is an issue with multi-core machines?
That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on this dual-core machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the single-core machine that's sitting beside it. Both running F8.
Amadeus W.M. wrote:
Man, is flash broken (again?) or what? It was working before the upgrade to flash-10, but now cnn videos are very choppy when they play, or simply don't play at all. Do other people have this problem? I have a hyperthreaded 2.8GHz processor and cnn video takes some 70% on each thread. Prior to the update I would see some 30-40% (as far as I can recall), and only on one of the threads, not both.
I haven't tried it on my laptop, but on my desktop (Intel dual core), the new flash 10 produces choppy video, oftentimes the video stops entirely while the audio continues playing, and then all of a sudden the video will fast-forward in a flurry and catch up.
I never thought to consider that it might be different on a different computer. Thought it was just a buggy release.
PS: I haven't visited any of those sites you guys mention: hulu, cnn, uefa, but I regularly visit youtube and continually experience these problems.
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:11:54 -0600 kwhiskerz kwhiskerz@gmail.com wrote:
PS: I haven't visited any of those sites you guys mention: hulu, cnn, uefa, but I regularly visit youtube and continually experience these problems.
youtube is actually one site that DOESN"T give me any problems.
kwhiskerz <kwhiskerz <at> gmail.com> writes:
I haven't tried it on my laptop, but on my desktop (Intel dual core), the new
flash 10 produces choppy video,
I am running F8 in a dual core machine with the latest flash 10 and KDE.
CNN video plays just fine on this machine so I don't think that the problem is related to dual core machines.
Possibly it may be specific to particular graphics hardware and driver?
Frank Cox wrote, On 10/20/2008 10:50 PM:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:10:57 -0500 Richard Shaw hobbes1069@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't find anything helpful with a quick Google search for "flash 10 multitheaded" but maybe it is an issue with multi-core machines?
That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on this dual-core machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the single-core machine that's sitting beside it. Both running F8.
have you considered/ever tried forcing flash &| the browser &| X processes to operate only on one processor (core) with taskset, just to see if it may be a context switching/processor cache bashing problem?
I have noticed on the dual Xeon 1.50GHz W/512MB I use, that if I lock X to the second processor, when visiting animated sites like http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?animate=true The whole system is smother and the animation is less glitchy. [with out locking X pulls ~85%cpu (of combined cpus), with locking X pulls ~10-50%cpu (of combined cpus), on that page after it self reloads.]
Frank Cox theatre@sasktel.net writes:
That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on this dual-core machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the single-core machine that's sitting beside it. Both running F8.
Another data point. Flash-10 works fine for me at www.cnn.com on this 4-core amd phenom computer (w. f9/64-bit with current yum updates).
I wonder what the difference is. Do you by any chance have libflashsupport installed? (I don't.)
-wolfgang
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht < wolfgang.rupprecht+gnus200810@gmail.comwolfgang.rupprecht%2Bgnus200810@gmail.com
wrote:
Frank Cox theatre@sasktel.net writes:
That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on this dual-core machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the single-core machine that's sitting beside it. Both running F8.
Another data point. Flash-10 works fine for me at www.cnn.com on this 4-core amd phenom computer (w. f9/64-bit with current yum updates).
I wonder what the difference is. Do you by any chance have libflashsupport installed? (I don't.)
-wolfgang
I have both the i386 and x86_64 installed on my F8 machine. I'm not sure if I still need it though...
Richard
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 20:32 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wolfgang.rupprecht+gnus200810@gmail.com wrote:
Frank Cox <theatre@sasktel.net> writes: > That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on > this dual-core machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the > single-core machine that's sitting beside it. Both running F8. Another data point. Flash-10 works fine for me at www.cnn.com on this 4-core amd phenom computer (w. f9/64-bit with current yum updates). I wonder what the difference is. Do you by any chance have libflashsupport installed? (I don't.) -wolfgang
I have both the i386 and x86_64 installed on my F8 machine. I'm not sure if I still need it though...
---- according to Rahul, you only need libflashsupport package(s) if you are using Flash 9 and if you are using Flash 10, then it's probably best to remove them.
Craig
"Richard Shaw" hobbes1069@gmail.com writes:
I have both the i386 and x86_64 installed on my F8 machine. I'm not sure if I still need it though...
In theory you don't need them. It didn't seem to hurt anything when I installed them temporarily, but your mileage may vary.
This problem is beginning to sound a bit like a timing problem, with some folks seeing it and others not.
-wolfgang
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 5:22 AM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht < wolfgang.rupprecht+gnus200810@gmail.comwolfgang.rupprecht%2Bgnus200810@gmail.com
wrote:
"Richard Shaw" hobbes1069@gmail.com writes:
I have both the i386 and x86_64 installed on my F8 machine. I'm not sure if I still need it though...
In theory you don't need them. It didn't seem to hurt anything when I installed them temporarily, but your mileage may vary.
This problem is beginning to sound a bit like a timing problem, with some folks seeing it and others not.
Before flash 10, almost any page containing flash used to segfault my firefox 32 on F8 (Intel quadcore). With flash 10, I am not having any issue whatsoever.
I am also not using libflash support or nspluginwrapper anymore.
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:35:08 -0600, Frank Cox wrote:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:11:54 -0600 kwhiskerz kwhiskerz@gmail.com wrote:
PS: I haven't visited any of those sites you guys mention: hulu, cnn, uefa, but I regularly visit youtube and continually experience these problems.
youtube is actually one site that DOESN"T give me any problems.
-- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com DRY CLEANER BUSINESS FOR SALE ~ http://www.canadadrycleanerforsale.com
Same here. Youtube and google video work fine. And some others. But with other sites like some credit card sites that use flash/java I can't even log in.
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:08:57 -0400, Todd Denniston wrote:
Frank Cox wrote, On 10/20/2008 10:50 PM:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:10:57 -0500 Richard Shaw hobbes1069@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't find anything helpful with a quick Google search for "flash 10 multitheaded" but maybe it is an issue with multi-core machines?
That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on this dual-core machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the single-core machine that's sitting beside it. Both running F8.
have you considered/ever tried forcing flash &| the browser &| X processes to operate only on one processor (core) with taskset, just to see if it may be a context switching/processor cache bashing problem?
I have noticed on the dual Xeon 1.50GHz W/512MB I use, that if I lock X to the second processor, when visiting animated sites like http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?animate=true The whole system is smother and the animation is less glitchy. [with out locking X pulls ~85%cpu (of combined cpus), with locking X pulls ~10-50%cpu (of combined cpus), on that page after it self reloads.]
-- Todd Denniston Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane) Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter
I know it's cliche and I hate to say it, but it works flawlessly at work in Windows XP on a 2 processor Xeon. So I'm inclined to believe it's a problem with the linux version of flash.
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:42:21 -0700, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
Frank Cox theatre@sasktel.net writes:
That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on this dual-core machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the single-core machine that's sitting beside it. Both running F8.
Another data point. Flash-10 works fine for me at www.cnn.com on this 4-core amd phenom computer (w. f9/64-bit with current yum updates).
I wonder what the difference is. Do you by any chance have libflashsupport installed? (I don't.)
-wolfgang
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht http://www.full-steam.org/ (ipv6-only) You may need to config 6to4 to see the above pages.
I tried both with and without libflashsupport. Absolutely no difference.
Todd Denniston wrote:
Frank Cox wrote, On 10/20/2008 10:50 PM:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:10:57 -0500 Richard Shaw hobbes1069@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't find anything helpful with a quick Google search for "flash 10 multitheaded" but maybe it is an issue with multi-core machines?
That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on this dual-core machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the single-core machine that's sitting beside it. Both running F8.
have you considered/ever tried forcing flash &| the browser &| X processes to operate only on one processor (core) with taskset, just to see if it may be a context switching/processor cache bashing problem?
I have noticed on the dual Xeon 1.50GHz W/512MB I use, that if I lock X to the second processor, when visiting animated sites like http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?animate=true The whole system is smother and the animation is less glitchy. [with out locking X pulls ~85%cpu (of combined cpus), with locking X pulls ~10-50%cpu (of combined cpus), on that page after it self reloads.]
Other than in the "Advertisement" area I don't see any other "flash" on http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?animate=true .
When you were talking about "less glitchy" were you talking about the radar animation or some other aspect of that page? The radar animation is part of javascript.
Ed Greshko wrote, On 10/23/2008 08:15 PM:
Todd Denniston wrote:
Frank Cox wrote, On 10/20/2008 10:50 PM:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:10:57 -0500 Richard Shaw hobbes1069@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't find anything helpful with a quick Google search for "flash 10 multitheaded" but maybe it is an issue with multi-core machines?
That's a thought. I have never been able to watch CNN videos on this dual-core machine, even with Flash 10, but they work on the single-core machine that's sitting beside it. Both running F8.
have you considered/ever tried forcing flash &| the browser &| X processes to operate only on one processor (core) with taskset, just to see if it may be a context switching/processor cache bashing problem?
I have noticed on the dual Xeon 1.50GHz W/512MB I use, that if I lock X to the second processor, when visiting animated sites like http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?animate=true The whole system is smother and the animation is less glitchy. [with out locking X pulls ~85%cpu (of combined cpus), with locking X pulls ~10-50%cpu (of combined cpus), on that page after it self reloads.]
Other than in the "Advertisement" area I don't see any other "flash" on http://www.intellicast.com/National/Radar/Current.aspx?animate=true .
When you were talking about "less glitchy" were you talking about the radar animation or some other aspect of that page? The radar animation is part of javascript.
Sorry. You are correct that I was less than clear... I don't have flash on my systems, as it has to be upgraded too often for security holes.
I meant that the animations were less glitchy, and that the whole X session was less glitchy.