I'm wondering what results folks have with various Macs trying to play full-screen (preferably on a 1080p display) Flash from Hulu HD.

ie. http://www.hulu.com/watch/58936/legend-of-the-seeker-home#s-p1-so-i0

Let the video load and then hit the "full screen" icon at the top right of the viewer area.

From what I can glean on the unix/windows side, GPU will have very little to do with performance.. it appears to be mostly CPU bound. If you can ssh to your machine while its playing in full screen and run "top" in the terminal window and see how much CPU % it chews up. And just in general whether the video is jerky or has any tearing.

Full-screen from Hulu HD appears to be MUCH more difficult for HTPC than full screen from Youtube, etc. (testing on a 2.7GHz dual-core AMD machine with linux puts cpu usage averaging 130%)

Just trying to get a feel for what the minimum needed configuration would be to play these well (and it may be that nothing short of a Mac Pro will suffice)

Hulu HD lists its specs as * Flash Player 9.0.115.0 or higher
* 2.5Mbps Internet connection or greater
* Windows: Intel Pentium 4 3GHz processor (or equivalent), 128MB of RAM, 64MB of VRAM
* Macintosh: Intel Core Duo 1.83GHz or faster processor, 256MB of RAM, 64MB of VRAM
* Linux: Intel Pentium 4 3GHz processor (or equivalent), 128MB of RAM, 64MB of VRAM

it is curious that the Mac requirements are almost HALF what is listed for the other OS's.. perhaps Adobe has managed to make Flash that much more efficient for OS X.

Other info in this thread: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1079256

it is curious that the Mac requirements are almost HALF what is listed for the other OS's.. perhaps Adobe has managed to make Flash that much more efficient for OS X.

No, it is the other way around:
* Windows: Intel Pentium 4 3GHz processor (or equivalent), 128MB of RAM, 64MB of VRAM
* Macintosh: Intel Core Duo 1.83GHz or faster processor, 256MB of RAM, 64MB of VRAM
A 1.83GHz CoreDuo runs rings around a 3GHz P3 and the Mac requires double the memory as well. Adobe's Mac OS X Flash software sucks. That's one reason why Jobs & co. have been adamant about keeping Flash off the iPhone -- if Adobe can't write a decent Flash for Mac OS X there is no chance they will succeed on the mobile version. Let them demonstrate they can do the Mac version first.

No, it is the other way around:

A 1.83GHz CoreDuo runs rings around a 3GHz P3 and the Mac requires double the memory as well. Adobe's Mac OS X Flash software sucks. That's one reason why Jobs & co. have been adamant about keeping Flash off the iPhone -- if Adobe can't write a decent Flash for Mac OS X there is no chance they will succeed on the mobile version. Let them demonstrate they can do the Mac version first.

I'm comparing against a 2.7GHz dualcore Athlon 5200+. It CANNOT play this stream without tearing/stutter. So if Hulu is claiming that an 1.83GHz processor on the Mac can handle this, then from my perspective, the Mac requirement is lower.

EDIT: regardless of semantics of more/less/bigger/smaller.. the question I'm trying to get answered is what minimum Mac is needed.

I stopped by the Apple Store tonite and played with the new Mac Mini... I fired up Hulu HD full-screen and ssh'd in to the Mini from another box and ran top.

CPU was ~140%, which is comparable to the 2.8GHz Athlon I have under Linux.

On the plus side, despite the high cpu%, there was no visible tearing or stutter that I could see.

I tried on a white Macbook as well, but didn't push my luck and ask them to hook up an external 1080p display so it would have to push a comparable # of pixels.

zim

CPU can't run above 100%..where are you getting those numbers?

I've been using Macbook Pro in standard video mode with Hulu for some time, works great, no issues...off battery even for a 2 hour movie, no problem. I'm probably getting a mini as a dedicated HTPC this weekend.

zim

CPU can't run above 100%..where are you getting those numbers?

Yes it can -- if it has two cores it can run at 200%.

I've been working with multiprocessor systems since 1986, so for me CPUs that only go to 100% are weird ;)

I've been using Macbook Pro in standard video mode with Hulu for some time, works great, no issues...off battery even for a 2 hour movie, no problem. I'm probably getting a mini as a dedicated HTPC this weekend.

for a real good stress-test you'll need to

a) export to something with more res than a MBP screen, 1080p is best
b) try hulu/hd episode 1 of "Legend of the Seeker" opens with a flyover of mountains and then a horse chase.. lots of fast motion to make a processor struggle.

I did a little more testing last night.. 2.7GHz running Vista.. mild frame drop (even when video was well buffered) but no visible tearing.

so far OS X is winning hands down. Same cpu% with 29% less cpu MHz (altho I'm not sure if Athlon 5200+ compares to C2D).. and somehow less frame drop.

Edit: Tom's hardware cpu charts seem to equate a 2.6GHz Athlon 5200+ with a~ 2.13GHz C2D. So its more of a wash, altho OS X seemed to do a better job not dropping frames.

Yes it can -- if it has two cores it can run at 200%.

I've been working with multiprocessor systems since 1986, so for me CPUs that only go to 100% are weird ;)

They made multi-core Vaxen? :)

I'm wondering what results folks have with various Macs trying to play full-screen (preferably on a 1080p display) Flash from Hulu HD.

ie. http://www.hulu.com/watch/58936/legend-of-the-seeker-home#s-p1-so-i0

Let the video load and then hit the "full screen" icon at the top right of the viewer area.I have a 720p display - not sure what difference that makes. But on a 2.0 GHz core2duo mini (3-year-old machine w/processor upgrade) this show plays fine in full screen. Activity monitor shows firefox using 160-170%.

Two points-
1) Once the show loaded, I needed to hit pause for about 30 seconds and let the buffer grow to 3 bars, after which everything worked well. Purely due to my crappy cheap DSL
2) If I exited full screen, I could notice some slight jerkiness in the playback that certainly was not present in full screen mode

Now, if there were only keyboard mappings instead of the mouse driven interface, I could use my remote control...

I have a 720p display - not sure what difference that makes. But on a 2.0 GHz core2duo mini (3-year-old machine w/processor upgrade) this show plays fine in full screen. Activity monitor shows firefox using 160-170%.

Two points-
1) Once the show loaded, I needed to hit pause for about 30 seconds and let the buffer grow to 3 bars, after which everything worked well. Purely due to my crappy cheap DSL
2) If I exited full screen, I could notice some slight jerkiness in the playback that certainly was not present in full screen mode

Now, if there were only keyboard mappings instead of the mouse driven interface, I could use my remote control...

Good info thanks! Yeah, I'm not sure how much difference a 720p vs 1080p display makes.

I'm wondering what results folks have with various Macs trying to play full-screen (preferably on a 1080p display) Flash from Hulu HD.

2 year old 1.83 Core Duo Mini, works great. New Adobe MLB (baseball) flash player also fine at full screen.

Is HuluHD just the same as the 480p link that is available on all videos?

Heck, my 1.6 CD does a fair job with most of that content (outputting to 1080i), as long as the computer isn't doing anything else. It drops frames during high-action sequences but the sound is so much better than the low-res stream I put up with it. If the computer is doing anything else (like recording something with EyeTV), or if it is a show that uses shaky cinematography, forget it.

I can deal with it for now, but I'll be in the market for a new Mini once Snow Leopard comes out.

Is HuluHD just the same as the 480p link that is available on all videos?

Heck, my 1.6 CD does a fair job with most of that content (outputting to 1080i), as long as the computer isn't doing anything else. It drops frames during high-action sequences but the sound is so much better than the low-res stream I put up with it. If the computer is doing anything else (like recording something with EyeTV), or if it is a show that uses shaky cinematography, forget it.

I can deal with it for now, but I'll be in the market for a new Mini once Snow Leopard comes out.

no, 480p isn't hd, it's just progressive sd. hulu does have hd video, go to hulu and click the link at the top that says 'hd gallery'. there are about 6 hd videos on hulu right now, i think they're in 720p. my dual 2ghz g5 with 2.5 gigs of ram basically can't play them. they load up and then safari becomes really unresponsive, and i get about 1 frame every 3 seconds or so. i went to the apple store and tested hulu hd videos, and everything i tried played really smooth. i tried all the laptops (air, macbook[s] and mb pro) and two imacs.

hulu is irritating, not only are they being dickish about boxee, but they used to have quite a bit of hd content (the office and battlestar galactica, 30 rock, etc.). now they have next to nothing.

They made multi-core Vaxen? :)

lol, seriously though...hulu not the best quality...but not bad either...http://z09a0222gshv273.imageshacknow.info/img/3044/e09e0225fewt/tongue.gif

2 year old 1.83 Core Duo Mini, works great. New Adobe MLB (baseball) flash player also fine at full screen.

Interesting! I'm borrowing a 1.83 Core Duo Mini with 1GB RAM this weekend before buying a far-away friends 2.0 C2D Mini for an HTPC. I tried the Legend of the Seeker intro clip (that show is great in almost every way, except writing :P) and it seemed to be dropping frames occassionally. Enough to be annoying. CPU was in the 160%-ish range.

I wonder what might be different?

I tried both Safari 4 beta and Firefox. Now, the 1.83 Core Duo Mini is booted via FW 400 from a backup of 10.5.6 from my 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo Macbook Pro. I would re-test with my Macbook Pro, because I watched all of that Legend of the Seeker episode when I was sick (full screen outputting to 1080i to my 1080p projector) and it was totally fine, but I thought the last time I tried (with Safari 4 beta) it was a little jumpy.

OP's goal is to determine the minimum Mac required, I certainly wouldn't go lower than their minimum requirements of 1.83 Core Duo. :) I saw someone say that their dual 2.0 G5 can't do it, so I didn't boot mine, or bother with my Powerbook G4 ;)

Interesting! I'm borrowing a 1.83 Core Duo Mini with 1GB RAM this weekend before buying a far-away friends 2.0 C2D Mini for an HTPC. I tried the Legend of the Seeker intro clip (that show is great in almost every way, except writing :P) and it seemed to be dropping frames occassionally. Enough to be annoying. CPU was in the 160%-ish range.

I wonder what might be different?


I have 2GB of RAM, using Safari 4 Beta.

Interesting! I'm borrowing a 1.83 Core Duo Mini with 1GB RAM this weekend before buying a far-away friends 2.0 C2D Mini for an HTPC. I tried the Legend of the Seeker intro clip (that show is great in almost every way, except writing :P) and it seemed to be dropping frames occassionally. Enough to be annoying. CPU was in the 160%-ish range.

I wonder what might be different?

I tried both Safari 4 beta and Firefox. Now, the 1.83 Core Duo Mini is booted via FW 400 from a backup of 10.5.6 from my 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo Macbook Pro. I would re-test with my Macbook Pro, because I watched all of that Legend of the Seeker episode when I was sick (full screen outputting to 1080i to my 1080p projector) and it was totally fine, but I thought the last time I tried (with Safari 4 beta) it was a little jumpy.

OP's goal is to determine the minimum Mac required, I certainly wouldn't go lower than their minimum requirements of 1.83 Core Duo. :) I saw someone say that their dual 2.0 G5 can't do it, so I didn't boot mine, or bother with my Powerbook G4 ;)

I am at a loss to explain how the 2.0GHz model seems to handle it so well (I saw it with my own eyes for a brief test at the Apple Store).. only thing I didn't double-check was that the Flash quality setting was at "highest" (I know with GreaseMonkey in Firefox, I automatically drop Flash quality to Lowest for general surfing speed-up)

Even on a 3.0 GHz iMac, it still runs 1 core close to 100%, so a 2.0GHz should be close to 160%(?) Under Windows and Ubuntu I saw frame drops at ~130-140% cpu.

Then again, one would think Adobe will improve Flash one of these days ;)

So I think the new mini is probably right at the edge. The current Macbooks (white included) are probably ok too (would be nice to see/test one hooked up to a 1080p display tho).

Its a definite caution tho against any ION-based Apple systems (if they ever come to pass), since the Atom would never be able to handle this :(

thanks for all the data points!