|
Re: Measurement of CPU usage
de PaulFXH 05/07/2006 03:00
Jast escreveu:
> PaulFXH wrote:
> > Jast escreveu:
> >
> >> PaulFXH wrote:
> >>> Hi
> >>> Not looking for FreeWare--just trying to hear some opinions on
> >>> something that been bothering me for some time.
> >>> I use WinMe as OS and have downloaded various small utilities (all
>
> Ok
>
> Personally I would be more inclined to trust process explorer. Does the
> task manager in win98 show a graph like it does in winxp? If so just
> compare this graph against all the other ones.
WinTop in WinMe, which is the equivalent of Task Manager in WinXP, does
not show a graph. On the other hand, both FreeMeter and ACPU do show
graphs.
Not sure, however, how this helps as, for example, ACPU shows a line
graph which is exactly equivalent of the line graph in Process Explorer
except that it's graphing its higher numbers.
Paul
>
>
> >>> FREE) to view CPU Usage on my computer.
> >>> These included Process Explorer, ActiveCPU, FreeMeter and WinTop.
> >>> Trouble is, they don't all show the same result. Indeed, the CPU Usage
> >>> results seem to fall into one of two distinct categories; very high or
> >>> very low.
> >>> As an example, while writing this I have all four of the above
> >>> utilities running showing the CPU usage (note that I have only one
> >>> single-core processor on this box). So, while Process Explorer and
> >>> WinTop show about 3.5% usage, FreeMeter and ActiveCPU, on the other
> >>> hand, both show about 64%.
> >>> I have seen exactly the same thing on at least one other computer
> >>> (running on WinXP).
> >>> I have posted to a number of groups trying to get somebody to explain
> >>> why there is this large difference and what significance should be
> >>> attached to it. I have even e-mailed the author of one of the
> >>> utilities.
> >>> However, up to now, nobody seems able, or willing, to provide an
> >>> explanation.
> >>> Is there anybody out there who can point me in the right direction on
> >>> this one?
> >>> TIA
> >>> Paul
> >>>
> > Hi Jast
> > Thanks a lot for your reply.
> > See my comments below.
> >> I guess it depends on how you are testing them? You should have a
> >> standard load set up, say a big avi file or something that maxes out
> >> your cpu at around 50 to 90% then monitor this using only one of your
> >> CPU monitors.
> > The problem here, Jast, is that I already have an indication of CPU
> > Usage in the range suggested by you. Thus, FreeMeter and ACPU were
> > reading 64% (more or less) when I did the test. Interestingly, this was
> > WITHOUT anything very big running, certainly no AVIs.
> >
> >> Then do the same thing with each one going. Running all of
> >> them at once will produce different results because they are sampling at
> >> different times and thus different results.
> >
> > OK, but the difference that I mentioned in my first post was 3.5% Vs.
> > 64%. That's very nearly a factor of 20. I don't think you need to be
> > mathematical genius to see that this is not due to different sampling
> > times.
> >
> >> Also, try increasing the
> >> sample period or update speed to something bigger, say at least 2 to 5
> >> seconds as this may average over a longer time and thus give better,
> >> smoother more accurate results.
> >
> > Actually, the sampling time, in those where it can be changed, is right
> > now 2 seconds. Even so, were the difference between the various results
> > 4% Vs. 4.5%, I think we might be able to attribute it to a sampling
> > problem.
> > But 3.5% Vs. 64%, I thing we can safely rule out sampling as an
> > explanation for this astronomical difference.
> >
> > Thanks again
> > Paul
> >