View Full Version : [ubuntu] ubuntu 8.10 vs Windows XP flash performance

November 3rd, 2008, 07:32 PM
Is ubuntu significantly slower than XP or am I missing something?

I Installed 8.10 from www.ubuntu.com, on an older XP system (2.4Ghz P4, 1Gb ram, Nvidia 6600GT). After installing the basic OS, installed the recommended nvidia driver, then installed the recommended flash player, as directed by Firefox.

Visiting www.hulu.com in firebox v3 on both systems I see the following results:

XP in browser window - perfect framerate, avg 35% cpu use.
XP full screen - maybe misses the odd frame, avg 90% cpu use.

Ubuntu in browser window - perfect framerate, avg 65% cpu use.
Ubuntu full screen - very noticeable framerate drop, cpu maxed out at 100%

After reading about its efficiency over XP, I was a little disappointed with ubunto. Unless there is something I've missed, XP is clearly faster at playing back flash video. Maybe the flash drivers or nvidia drivers in XP are better?

December 3rd, 2010, 02:21 AM
hey buddy the reason you are getting these types of results is simply because windows xp is less cpu hungry then Ubuntu is. if you want to try Linux i would recommend you do a xubuntu install or try something smaller like DSL (damn small linux) i believe was the name but overall in my test's i have shown that with ubuntu you can process and allocate random access memory alot more effectively and due to the difference between ntfs and ext4 your ubuntu installation should work rather quickly on the hard drive side of things but remember this is in my own opinion. and also this post should be moved from ati nvidia sound cards to beginners section. have a great day good bye.

December 3rd, 2010, 03:40 AM
Why the fsck did you bump a 2 year old thread?