Computer Help: Processor usage stuck at 100%
Sep 5, 2003 at 7:58 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 13

redshifter

High Fidelity Gentility• redrum....I mean redshifter• Pee-pee. Hoo-hoo.• I ♥ Garfield
Joined
Aug 12, 2001
Posts
10,223
Likes
24
i'm not sure what is causing this, but my processor seem to be stuck at 100% useage all the time. i shut down a lot of background apps (you can see the proc use drop in the graph when i did), but it stays nailed at 100%. this slows EVERYTHING down, even the mouse pointer draaaaags across the screen.

i can't remember what the debug steps are for this. does anyone know what the issue is?

it is a p2 400 ibm aptiva i've had since 1999, and generally only use it for internet and some digital recording.

attachment.php
 
Sep 5, 2003 at 9:03 PM Post #3 of 13
You might have some kind of virus, spyware, or file-sharing service eating your CPU. Also worth noting: YOU CPU NEEDS AN UPGRADE!!!!
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
 
Sep 5, 2003 at 9:53 PM Post #4 of 13
There is a program that I forgot what it's called but it gives you a detailed process listing in Win95/98/ME. At least with that you can see what's going bonkers. Maybe somebody knows what it is?
 
Sep 5, 2003 at 10:03 PM Post #5 of 13
Does killing Explorer (can't tell if you're running 95/98/2000 so not sure if this is possible) and relaunching it stop the problem?

Trying to figure out if it's a secondary prog or the shell.
 
Sep 6, 2003 at 1:12 AM Post #6 of 13
Process Explorer is freeware, easy to use and interpret. Be sure to download the version for 9x/Me, if indeed that's your OS.

Sysinternals Freeware - Process Explorer:
http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/fr.../procexp.shtml

The System Monitor (sysmon.exe) in Windows 9x/Me is notoriously inaccurate in terms of reporting CPU use.

TravelLite
 
Sep 6, 2003 at 5:07 AM Post #7 of 13
http://www.geocities.com/ziyadhosein/w9xtwks.htm

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1158080,00.asp

Do you have Norton AntiVirus and a firewall installed?

On ME I like setting a static swap space. Some say no more than 512MB, I like 1.5x memory (in my case 768MB).

I also like to edit system.ini and in the [VCache] section I usually set MinFileCache = 1024 * Mem (256 MB mem = 262144, 128 MB mem = 131072)
MaxFileCache=1024*mem size
then save the system.ini and reboot.

*** your performance may actually DECREASE with the above, depending on the amount of memory you have. if you have 128, try it and see, and if there is a decrease in performance, then remove or increase or decrease.

and like the links above say, setting ActiveSwapfileUseage=1 and setting SysPage=4000.

obviously I do not have anything in config.sys and autoexec.bat if I am not running legacy games and hardware.

mkae sure that all internet connection apps are not running (AOL, MSN, Yahoo Messenger, etc, soundblaster news, mcafee updater, etc).

what's running when you run TweakUI? http://www.microsoft.com/ntworkstati.../NTTweakUI.asp

what happens if you close down your system tray apps? (I see pointer32 - isn't this an intellimouse app?)

http://www.tucows.com/preview/232482.html

http://www.totalidea.com/frameset-tweak.htm

you did run spybot with the latest updates and adaware with the latest updates, right? I hope that you do not have kwaaza spys running.

good luck.

(but i still think it's Norton if you are running that app). http://www.reger24.de/prozesse/navapw32.exe.html
http://www.liutilities.com/products/...rary/navapw32/

hidserv: http://www.liutilities.com/products/...brary/hidserv/
"Backround Service which provides support for USB Audio Devices and USB Multimedia keyboards"

in which case it could very well be a slow USB
wink.gif
http://support.microsoft.com/default...NoWebContent=1

*** http://www.answersthatwork.com/Taskl...tasklist_h.htm ***
 
Sep 6, 2003 at 7:53 AM Post #8 of 13
From the picture it looks like you are running win9x/me. If I remember correctly, any non NT kernel will always keep your cpu running at full capacity unless you have programs to control it (ie, cpu idle [?]) So it looks normal to me unless I've overlooked something. Your computer might be slow for other reasons such as spyware, misconfigured system settings, virus and etc. There too many possiblity.
 
Sep 6, 2003 at 8:44 AM Post #10 of 13
Pep,

I find that true of my W2K, but I hit, on average, 30% max on my ME (512MB mem & McAfee).

Red,

What does your Resource Meter say? Mine is at about 78% (System Reources 76%/User Resources76%/GDI Resources 82%).
 
Sep 6, 2003 at 9:05 AM Post #11 of 13
Quote:

Originally posted by wallijonn
hidserv: http://www.liutilities.com/products/...brary/hidserv/
"Backround Service which provides support for USB Audio Devices and USB Multimedia keyboards"

in which case it could very well be a slow USB
wink.gif
http://support.microsoft.com/default...NoWebContent=1

*** http://www.answersthatwork.com/Taskl...tasklist_h.htm *** [/B]




Hi wallijohn. Based on the screen shot and the age of the computer, its most likely 98, possibly 98SE, maybe even 95, and according to the technet article you refrenced, it only applies to 2000 Server and Windows ME, please pay attention to the advice you are giving. And as for the rest of your stuff, he obviously isn't very computer savvy, recomending doing all that to someone who dosen't know what they are doing is generally unwise. Take into consideration the skill level of who you are talking to please.
 
Sep 6, 2003 at 10:10 PM Post #12 of 13
maverick,
i'm running win ME if you must know. i'm also fairly adept at desktop computing, in xp pro, xp home, win98 1st, win98 2nd, win 95, win 2k, and even me. i run test passes on all these configurations and often have to hack them to get the builds to run right (i'm an ste as microsoft), but right now the proc issue (which i have seen before and fixed) eludes me.

yes i need a new computer. i'll send you my address if you're going to mail me one. otherwise, you know.

everyone else who offered good advice, thank you.

wallijon,
yes i run nav and use outpost firewall. but as you can see (in the screenshot) all that was running was nav, which i then closed--but the proc stayed spiked. later when i have more time i'll d/l those apps and do some more digging.

at first i thought it was media player 7, which is a resource hog (i know, i was on the team that developed it--sorry). even after closing wmp the proc was at 100% and stayed there. the weird thing was that yesterday i never opened wmp7.

btw, i just started my pc and noticed that the proc usage is at a steady 10% right now. all normal background apps and tray items are in use.

anyway, thanks for the links and advice, it is so much easier in XP pro to fix these things (sigh).
 
Sep 6, 2003 at 11:31 PM Post #13 of 13
red,

i would completely remove the NAV app rather than close it to test, just because it is still mapped in memory and will probably take a long time to flush; is there dreg queues in ME? isn't that one of it's main failings?

as it is now at 10%, do you find that after an hour (and monitoring every 5 minutes of activity) the resources do not decrease after a reasonable amount of inactivity? if so, then the cache and mem optimizations should work, provided that you have enough memory. If you have more than 512MB and have not tweaked the mem/cache settings, then this is most likely where your problem lies.

do not believe what is being shown on the screen as completely factual, as you are not taking into account subprocesses nor processes which were swapped out. This is why msconfig is so important as it will actually show you what is being loaded on startup, along with TweakUI which shows you the actual .ini files and allows you to set paranoid IE settings to cut down on caches, histories, etc. and which may free up memory resources and along with them their attendent pointers.

btw, I find that any software firewall consumes about 50% of the cpu process time. add internet and email filtering to the antivirus program and you have probably eaten up about 75% of your cpu time and resources. add an internet ad blocker and you can probably add another 10%, although this is probably only noticeable when directly surfing. in which case I hope your NIC is on it's own IRQ, as it may further compound the problem.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top