Does 1080p (flash) video run perfectly on a Pentium 4 2.8 GHz CPU with 1 GB RAM?

[s3a]

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, her screen resolution is 1280x800 but she can get a few more pixels by choosing 1080p instead of 720p so does that count as 1080p (aka 1920x1080) or (approximately) 1280x800 in terms of CPU stress?

Edit: You edited your last post and said the computer displays at 1080p but did you mean it displays a 1080p flash video at 1080p or just that you logged in and used the computer for "regular things" at 1080p?

Edit #2:
Did you use the proprietary flash or an open source alternative? Could you please try viewing a 1080p flash video with the screen resolution at 1280x800 (or the closest resolution to that which you can achieve)?

[pqwoerituytrueiwoq]

flashplugin-installer (11.2.202.238ubuntu0.12.04.1) on firefox 14.0.1
resolution:1280x768
both 720p and 1080p full screen playback suck 360p looks best
test video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSGBVzeBUbk

do you have any old hardware to work with? (case/sata dvd/sata hdd/power supply)

attached copy of hwinfo from P4 system

[s3a]

I tested that video on my laptop which runs (the frozen) Debian 7.0 Wheezy/Testing at 480p using the open source gnash (0.8.11) player on Iceweasel (=Firefox fork) 10.0.7 and it ran perfectly however, the laptop has a Pentium Dual Core E2180 CPU (the CPU is a Core 2 Duo with less L2 Cache and not a Pentium D). My laptop is also running in 64 bit whereas my mother's computer would be running in 32 bit.

I have parts lying around in a closet but, I think a bunch of the parts (particularly the motherboard) are fried so, I can't build her a computer or build one for me to test. (If I could build one for me to test, I would just give that to her.) The parts are essentially an entire computer excluding the tower (but, to reiterate, at least one of the parts are fried).

[pqwoerituytrueiwoq]

this is a quality budget build (2.5" bay adapter is needed to properly mount ssd, but you can safely leave it on the bottom of the case plugged in)

[Stonecold1995]

I'm pretty sure it'd work. That CPU seems powerful enough, and the amount of RAM doesn't really matter that much (flash videos don't use much memory). Of course, if the flash videos are written poorly, they may be too CPU intensive and will run slowly anyways. For example, my laptop has a quad-core i7 @ 2.4 GHz with 16 GB of RAM, and yet there are still some flash videos and games that run ridiculously slow. So don't expect all flash videos to run perfectly.

[Statia]

Is that sarcasm ??

No, that is utter confusion. You state Flash is twice as slow on Linux as on Windows. A very firm statement, yet you give it without any source for verification. Instead you offer to tell us your own experience, but then you proceed to tell us about a machine that runs XP. As far as I know XP is a flavour of Windows, not a Linux distribution.

I guess you are trying to say "look, a machine with this and this specification already drops frames playing Flash videos while running XP, so the experience in Linux is going to be twice as bad", but it doesn't really come across and you still don't substantiate your "twice as slow on Linux"claim, which I find hard to believe.
(Besides, XP is an 11 year old OS. I would expect it to perform worse than Linux in most respects)

Do you have a link to any benchmarks that show a 50% lower FPS on the same hardware for Linux vs Windows?

[sumancs]

Depends on your OS. 1080p flash runs perfectly on my Pentium 4 PC (3GHz) with 512MB RAM with WinXP installed.