Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

Dethredic · 2011-07-13 22:14:35

release page: http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer11.html
direct download link: http://download.macromedia.com/pub/labs … 311.tar.gz
summary of new stuff: http://www.bytearray.org/?p=3216

I hope this works well!

EDIT: someone made a pkgbuild:
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=50704

Last edited by Dethredic (2011-07-14 21:47:38)

WorMzy · 2011-07-13 22:48:30

x86_46 eh?

Thanks for the link, I've been using the 32-bit version for a few weeks now, since the old "square" version hasn't been updated in about half a year or so.

EDIT: Seems to work fine. No 100% processor peaks yet, and I have audio and visual. Lets hope they keep updating this one, eh?

Last edited by WorMzy (2011-07-13 22:56:29)

Meyithi · 2011-07-13 22:51:28

Ack, this means there is no reason to carry on using i686 on my Atom n450 netbook, cba re-installing

SS4 · 2011-07-13 22:59:13

I wonder if they solved the security bug? I'm going to stick to Gnash and Lightspark because it's free.

tomk · 2011-07-13 22:59:49

Could be good, but keep Adobe's track record in mind here, and watch out for related security advisories.

I'm also using it myself.

Dethredic · 2011-07-13 23:07:23

Is it just me or does this make the yourtube player look different?

Diaz · 2011-07-13 23:27:18

Dethredic wrote:

Is it just me or does this make the yourtube player look different?

they remembered to change the player today, not related since i'm still using the old flash version compatible with x86_64

bwat47 · 2011-07-14 05:01:56

Awesome. I had problems with the 10.2 based flash square release on various sites (on many videos stuff from the controls like the video time would still show over the video even when the controls were hidden, and fullescreen was totally broken) so I was using 32 bit flash. Flash 11 64 bit works flawlessly here, I no longer need all those 32 bit libs installed and performance is better . Haven't noticed any bugs either, running very stable for a beta.

I am disappointed non-nvidia cards still don't have hardware acceleration, but this is still a big improvement.

firecat53 · 2011-07-14 05:08:55

I just wish the full screen performance had been improved Otherwise works fine.

Scott

el mariachi · 2011-07-14 07:55:32

Only VDPAU support bah... it's still good to see it updated though, and I've got no issues so far.

litemotiv · 2011-07-14 08:06:30

Dethredic wrote:

EDIT: someone made a pkgbuild:
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=50704

As commented on the AUR page:

cyberpatrol wrote:

No, please, not a flashplugin package more. Flash 11 is in beta and there's already a package flashplugin-beta in AUR. So, please, let this package be removed from AUR.

Cdh · 2011-07-14 10:38:53

Still not good.

I tried this video:
http://www.gamestar.de/index.cfm?pid=1589&pk=18888

Fullscreen on second screen still has the wrong size.
Fullscreen still needs 100 % cpu on one core and still stutters and laggs occassionally ~1 second. And this is a (mobile) i5 overclocked with the turbo thing to 2,9 GHz!

Come on, a modern i5 2,9GHz (!!!!) CPU choking on playing a video?

Xyne · 2011-07-14 14:00:14

Cdh wrote:

Come on, a modern i5 2,9GHz (!!!!) CPU choking on playing a video?

The (im)possibilities of Flash are endless!

The true irony of course is that they named it "Flash". It should probably have been named "Sloth" instead.

litemotiv · 2011-07-14 14:26:49

Xyne wrote:

The true irony of course is that they named it "Flash". It should probably have been named "Sloth" instead.

Muahahaha

Viper_Scull · 2011-07-14 15:29:12

well guys. it's the first time i can watch 1080p videos full screen smoothly. At least let's give them that with this release.

Said that. Die flash, die!

Last edited by Viper_Scull (2011-07-14 15:30:35)

venky80 · 2011-07-14 19:03:01

is VDPAU only for i686 or for x86_64 too?

lilsirecho · 2011-07-14 19:37:19

Great news indeed. Hope it gets upgraded periodically.

Speaking of upgrade:

@Dethredic

Perhaps the title would look more professional if it referred to x86_64.......

Last edited by lilsirecho (2011-07-14 19:45:45)

karol · 2011-07-14 20:06:09

lilsirecho wrote:

Great news indeed. Hope it gets upgraded periodically..

Who would have thought you would live long enough to see it ;-)

lilsirecho wrote:

Perhaps the title would look more professional if it referred to x86_64.......

Good catch with the typo.

Cdh · 2011-07-14 22:06:21

It has a new 3D API. They seem to want to make a new generation of flash games.
Here is a demo application:
http://alternativaplatform.com/en/demos/maxracer/

I tried the "high" version on Arch and on Windows 7. On Windows 7 it's actually kind of playable. Not very smooth, but playable.

On Linux it's horrible. It's like the whole thing is done in software rendering. Actually I think a well written 3d animation in pure software rendering would be faster.

Both with my laptop with an i5 480 and hd 6550 with catalyst 11.6.

I really wonder: Do they do that on purpose? Is it possible for them to write such bad portable code?

Army · 2011-07-14 22:43:28

Xyne wrote:

The true irony of course is that they named it "Flash". It should probably have been named "Sloth" instead.

*lol* Very true!

bwat47 · 2011-07-14 22:56:20

Cdh wrote:

It has a new 3D API. They seem to want to make a new generation of flash games.
Here is a demo application:
http://alternativaplatform.com/en/demos/maxracer/
I tried the "high" version on Arch and on Windows 7. On Windows 7 it's actually kind of playable. Not very smooth, but playable.
On Linux it's horrible. It's like the whole thing is done in software rendering. Actually I think a well written 3d animation in pure software rendering would be faster.
Both with my laptop with an i5 480 and hd 6550 with catalyst 11.6.
I really wonder: Do they do that on purpose? Is it possible for them to write such bad portable code?

Yeah that ran horrifically on my machine even on light/medium (core i5 460m, intel graphics)

triplesquarednine · 2011-07-14 23:13:46

Dethredic wrote:

Is it just me or does this make the yourtube player look different?

that may be because youtube has changed their player in the last 24 hours. (you mean grey/black + transparency in the player's bar, right?)

Griemak · 2011-07-15 00:00:37

Hmmm...

I have hardware acceleration enabled and working. I watched the video in the link earlier and it was very smooth full screen.
http://www.gamestar.de/index.cfm?pid=1589&pk=18888

But it jumped 3 cores to 30-45% with the fourth core hovering in the high teens. Half way through, the cores dropped to mid-high teens across all 4. I hope a little more optimization occurs, but since it's proprietary, it is left simply as a hope

jskier · 2011-07-15 23:27:45

Griemak wrote:

Hmmm...
I have hardware acceleration enabled and working. I watched the video in the link earlier and it was very smooth full screen.
http://www.gamestar.de/index.cfm?pid=1589&pk=18888
But it jumped 3 cores to 30-45% with the fourth core hovering in the high teens. Half way through, the cores dropped to mid-high teens across all 4. I hope a little more optimization occurs, but since it's proprietary, it is left simply as a hope

Runs fine on an older Core2 duo, starts two cores around 10% ~ 15%. I think you need to ensure /etc/adobe/mms.cfg is set properly.

I've had hard system lock ups with Amazon Instant Video on occasion with the beta, but overall big improvements with hardware acceleration. Full screen has a very subtle flicker that comes and goes too.

Gusar · 2011-07-16 00:40:05

Griemak wrote:

I have hardware acceleration enabled and working. I watched the video in the link earlier and it was very smooth full screen.
http://www.gamestar.de/index.cfm?pid=1589&pk=18888
But it jumped 3 cores to 30-45% with the fourth core hovering in the high teens. Half way through, the cores dropped to mid-high teens across all 4. I hope a little more optimization occurs, but since it's proprietary, it is left simply as a hope

Because Adobe can't get the "presentation" part of VDPAU right, they've disabled it for now, so we only have the "decode" part of VDPAU currently. So there's definitely room of improvement, in Adobe properly implementing hardware presentation.

Arch Linux

#1 2011-07-13 22:14:35

Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#2 2011-07-13 22:48:30

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#3 2011-07-13 22:51:28

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#4 2011-07-13 22:59:13

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#5 2011-07-13 22:59:49

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#6 2011-07-13 23:07:23

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#7 2011-07-13 23:27:18

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#8 2011-07-14 05:01:56

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#9 2011-07-14 05:08:55

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#10 2011-07-14 07:55:32

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#11 2011-07-14 08:06:30

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#12 2011-07-14 10:38:53

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#13 2011-07-14 14:00:14

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#14 2011-07-14 14:26:49

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#15 2011-07-14 15:29:12

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#16 2011-07-14 19:03:01

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#17 2011-07-14 19:37:19

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#18 2011-07-14 20:06:09

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#19 2011-07-14 22:06:21

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#20 2011-07-14 22:43:28

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#21 2011-07-14 22:56:20

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#22 2011-07-14 23:13:46

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#23 2011-07-15 00:00:37

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#24 2011-07-15 23:27:45

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

#25 2011-07-16 00:40:05

Re: Flash 11 beta with x86_64 support!!!

Board footer