Do Browsers Matter?
Does Your Browser Matter?
Remember that there are two Flash plug-ins. There’s an ActiveX version written specifically for IE8 and another one for every other browser. The same applies for the DivX Plus Web Player, with one major difference. The non-ActiveX plug-in supplied by DivX is only compatible with Firefox. HiQ doesn't work with Opera 11, Safari 5, or Chrome 10. Also, note that we're testing with Firefox 3.6. Mozilla recently released Firefox 4.0, but it's incompatible with DivX Plus Web Player.
|DivX Plus Web PlayerAverage CPU UsageWindowed Playback: ASRock E350M1Aero Enabled, Hardware Acceleration Enabled
|IE8 32-bit: 8.0.7600.1685
|Adobe Flash PlayerAverage CPU UsageWindowed Playback: ASRock E350M1Aero Enabled, Hardware Acceleration Enabled
|IE8 32-bit: 8.0.7600.1685
Browsers do matter. In fact, the difference between Internet Explorer and Firefox is much greater than what we've see with Adobe Flash Player. This isn't a pure DivX versus Adobe duel. It's a matter of pairings. Adobe and DivX each have two separate plug-ins, which makes for a four-way fight. When played in a window, Adobe Flash Player and Internet Explorer generally win.
We noticed that 1080p in IE8 seems to break hardware acceleration support. We’ve occasionally seen this isolated anomaly with Flash at higher resolutions.
Our Sandy Bridge-based system sees little difference between browsers, but we would expect to see performance variance minimized given this platform's more potent processor. On older systems without hardware-accelerated decoding, like the first-gen Centrino, the difference between two software configurations can even manifest itself in crashes. For example, on our Atom-based netbook, we found it difficult to properly load DivX with Firefox. The HiQ plug-in stalls whenever it tries to load the Flash file. With Internet Explorer, DivX crashes whenever it tries to load high bit rate video. In our case, IE8 refused to correctly load any 1080p YouTube video.
Clearly it seems that on low-power systems, DivX doesn't mix well with Firefox. Internet Explorer is your best bet.
Current page: Do Browsers Matter?Prev Page DivX Plus Web Player: Not A Catch-All Solution Next Page What About Full-Screen Mode And Image Quality?
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
one of challenges of adobe flash player, i hope this can support my mobileReply
Useful! I'll take it!Reply
Does not work in chromeReply
so according to the title, divx can do the same funcionality as a whole, regarding flash plugin?Reply
can it be programmable, you can make animations, games, applications with divx player?
or does the text admit that flash is only about video? so adobe is pushing a whole software just to play video on browsers?
to the dear writer of this report, please understand that tom´s hardware is a long standing website, and it conquered the credibility of millions of people around the world, so be more carefull next time you wanna write a sensationalist title to bring people to your text.
flash does a lot more than playing video. and there´s no such thing as "flash video"... video is VIDEO, no matter played by flash, html5, "bleep-blam-bloom technology", whatever else.
and the day you have so many calculations and big chunks of scenery, characters, audio, and server liasons, you´ll have an impact in the system, no matter if its flash, html5, or anyother app.
magic doesnt happen out of flash. data weights anyway it comes, and theres no guarantee that producers are the best for their jobs, by working with optimizations in many levels of production.
simply theres no guarantee at all, so expect a heavy ugly bad optimized html5 applications in the future, that will impact on browser´s performance anytime sooner or later.
I'm not impressedReply
adobe may suck, but divx isn't much better as far as openness goes.
Star Trek on cbs is an absolute annoyance to watch ...
My gnash plugin don't work there
mayankleoboy1i wont use IE8 instead of FF to save any amount of battery.Why not use IE9? Toms found it to be one of the fastest browsers...Reply
Yes, IE 8 is slow...
While its great to have an alternative to flash, without support for the latest browsers (IE9, FF4, and most importantly for me Chrome) its not going to spread very far.Reply
Wow, what a puff piece. About that software came out over 6 months ago. Even the graph which is supposed to show how much better this software is for playing flash shows that CPU utilisation is the same if not worse than without. The article did also not mention that most have binned this version of divx player and gone back to older versions due to the amount of crashes the software causes in browsers. Cannot believe 6 pages was spent on this.Reply
And while I am complaining, cause normally I love the site, it's very annoying that comments I leave on the UK site don't appear on the US site, and visa versa. Can understand when a site is in a completely different language but Brits and Yanks can talk to each other yer know.
It's an article i already know about, but i've found divx CRASHES by ie8 browswer. While an OLDER version, doesn't.Reply
Only if they fix the program to run stable, will i use it. I don't need something that doesn't work most of the time.
People still use Internet Explorer?Reply
mayakleoboy & ph0b0s123: +1 and +1