Tip: Run a free scan for common Windows errors ad

re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 6:41 am Posted by Jason Trudeau (1 messages posted) This same proble happened to my computer aswell,I have been working on it for several days now, and with no luck I have been unable to find any solutions. It seems as though Sabrina and I are in the same boat. When I try to open for example Internet explorer all I get is a long wait and then "program not responding". This goes for many other programs aswell. Can some one please e-mail me if they have any tips or solutions. Regards J.Trudeau On Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 6:37 am, Sabrina wrote: >Does anyone know if I can disable this or why it's taking so much of my CPU? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 7:16 am Posted by Bob B (2307 messages posted) The system idle process is not the problem - actally, the higher the numbers on it, the better. From Microsoft: System Idle Process - You cannot end this process from Task Manager. This process is a single thread running on each processor, which has the sole task of accounting for processor time when the system isn't processing other threads. In Task Manager, expect this process to account for the majority of processor time. On Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 6:37 am, Sabrina wrote: >Does anyone know if I can disable this or why it's taking so much of my CPU? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 9:54 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) Exactly what Bob has said. If you have a slow computer something else is wrong, either in the drivers or hardware that may be incomaptible, or problem applications or software. If you did an upgrade over an old operating system instead of a clean install, this may be your problem. The idle process has been written about many times before in this forum. XP isn't the only operating system that has the idle process built in. It is there for a reason. The idle process takes place when the processor isn't being sent any other work to do indicating that you have problems somewhere else in your system preventing the work from getting to your processor hence, your slow system. The idle process halts the processor saving power and reducing heat until it gets actual work to do. Look at the performance tab in the task manager if you want to see actual CPU usage while you are working. C K On Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 6:37 am, Sabrina wrote: >Does anyone know if I can disable this or why it's taking so much of my CPU? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 12:46 am Posted by Clifford (3 messages posted) No, I believe that Sabrina's problem is real. I have the same problem. When no processes are running, the idle process should indeed consume all the available processor cycles. However this CPU time should not be accounted for in CPU usage on the performance tab, (otherwise it would always total 100%!). I my case, the only process logging time is the idle process, but the CPU usage is high. It never goes below about 22% in XP (compared with about 2% on NT), and often goes much higher (60-70%), and the system becomes very sluggish. The idle process should be ready to relinquish CPU to active processes at any time. If you select "show kernel times" from the "view" menu in Task Manager, it indicates that almost all the CPU cycles are accounted for by kernel time. I can only imagine that this is a driver problem, but I have not located it, but the problem may have arisen after installing a USB ADSL modem, but I have not confirmed this yet. Clifford [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 7:41 am Posted by Ed Shears (1 messages posted) I had the same problem when ripping CD's last night. The first 5 CD worked well, then, regardless of the condition of the CD i put in the drive, the SIP was running at greater that 97%. Also, the CPU usage bar graph was running at only 2-3 bars. I was using Windowa Media Player to rip the songs in WMA format. Also, like our friend before, even when logging onto the net via IE, it takes quite a while (several minutes a page). My hat off to Mr. Gates for creating products that require additonal expense on behalf of his customer to work right. On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 12:46 am, Clifford wrote: >No, I believe that Sabrina's problem is real. I have the same problem. When no processes >are running, the idle process should indeed consume all the available processor cycles. >However this CPU time should not be accounted for in CPU usage on the performance >tab, (otherwise it would always total 100%!). > >I my case, the only process logging time is the idle process, but the CPU usage is >high. It never goes below about 22% in XP (compared with about 2% on NT), and often >goes much higher (60-70%), and the system becomes very sluggish. > >The idle process should be ready to relinquish CPU to active processes at any time. >If you select "show kernel times" from the "view" menu in Task Manager, it indicates >that almost all the CPU cycles are accounted for by kernel time. > >I can only imagine that this is a driver problem, but I have not located it, but >the problem may have arisen after installing a USB ADSL modem, but I have not confirmed >this yet. > >Clifford > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 9:12 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) What are your system specs? Specifically the motherboard manufacturer and model. Some motherboards have incompatibilities and have had to require replacement or be returned to the manufacturer for modification. This has happened to me. In some cases, a BIOS upgrade can be done to fix it. There were MB's identified by MS and the vendors to be a problem. If you have one of those boards, the problem was that their design was not completed for the final ACPI spec. In some boards the CPU usage is being incorrectly reported. This can either involve a fix from MS or can be a design problem in the motherboard which can not be fixed and involves installing the Standard PC Hal which disables the ACPI. If it is a motherboard problem, you will find that what works in NT 4, does not work in Win 2000 and XP. As I have written before in this forum, the system idle process is also incorporated in other OP systems, incuding MAC OS X, Linux, etc. If any of you have used software CPU coolers for Win 9X, this is essentially all a software cooler is. It just adds the system idle process. To date in all of the systems I have worked on (thousands of them), hardware has been the cause for reported problems in the system idle process and high idle CPU usage/sluggish response. Anybody having problems, send your specs to me and I will research it for you. I am trying to compile a list of hardware that seems to be causing this problem in 2000 and XP. As I said, if everything works OK in NT4, and your CPU usage hangs high (30-60% while idle) under 2000 XP, (check it before any other software is installed) expect that you have a hardware problem and I suspect that your MB is 2 to 3 or more years older. If it is a new motherboard, (which I haven't seen any to date) you may have to contact the MB vendor and tell them the problem you are having. At that point both MS and the vendor will have to bump heads and decide what the problem is and how to fix it. C K On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 12:46 am, Clifford wrote: >No, I believe that Sabrina's problem is real. I have the same problem. When no processes >are running, the idle process should indeed consume all the available processor cycles. >However this CPU time should not be accounted for in CPU usage on the performance >tab, (otherwise it would always total 100%!). > >I my case, the only process logging time is the idle process, but the CPU usage is >high. It never goes below about 22% in XP (compared with about 2% on NT), and often >goes much higher (60-70%), and the system becomes very sluggish. > >The idle process should be ready to relinquish CPU to active processes at any time. >If you select "show kernel times" from the "view" menu in Task Manager, it indicates >that almost all the CPU cycles are accounted for by kernel time. > >I can only imagine that this is a driver problem, but I have not located it, but >the problem may have arisen after installing a USB ADSL modem, but I have not confirmed >this yet. > >Clifford > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 12:52 pm Posted by M P (3 messages posted) Ok CK... I have a Tyan ThunderBolt running dual P3 850, 2gigs of ram, 640 gigs of HD space using scsi and ide drives and a DVD-Ram and a DVD-R burner. I am currently experiencing sys idle process slowdown. For some reason, it starts using both processors, running at 92-96% during rendering and after about 10 minutes, one drops off and I only get around 55% of total processor power. I tried rebooting and it happened again but this time, the other processor dropped off after about 10 minutes. One time I let it render for about 4 hours under 50% and then all of the sudden, the other processor kicked in giving me back my 98%!!! What goes here?? I have upgraded the sys bios to the current, checked for newer drivers and installed, switched to a 530watt power supply, changed the processor heatsink fans, (this case has 13 fans throughout) so heat isn't the factor, I would assume. Your insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, M P On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 9:12 am, ckrokit wrote: >What are your system specs? Specifically the motherboard manufacturer and model. > Some motherboards have incompatibilities and have had to require replacement or >be returned to the manufacturer for modification. This has happened to me. In some >cases, a BIOS upgrade can be done to fix it. There were MB's identified by MS and >the vendors to be a problem. If you have one of those boards, the problem was that >their design was not completed for the final ACPI spec. In some boards the CPU usage >is being incorrectly reported. This can either involve a fix from MS or can be a >design problem in the motherboard which can not be fixed and involves installing >the Standard PC Hal which disables the ACPI. If it is a motherboard problem, you >will find that what works in NT 4, does not work in Win 2000 and XP. As I have written >before in this forum, the system idle process is also incorporated in other OP systems, >incuding MAC OS X, Linux, etc. If any of you have used software CPU coolers for >Win 9X, this is essentially all a software cooler is. It just adds the system idle >process. To date in all of the systems I have worked on (thousands of them), hardware >has been the cause for reported problems in the system idle process and high idle >CPU usage/sluggish response. Anybody having problems, send your specs to me and >I will research it for you. I am trying to compile a list of hardware that seems >to be causing this problem in 2000 and XP. As I said, if everything works OK in >NT4, and your CPU usage hangs high (30-60% while idle) under 2000 XP, (check it before >any other software is installed) expect that you have a hardware problem and I suspect >that your MB is 2 to 3 or more years older. If it is a new motherboard, (which I >haven't seen any to date) you may have to contact the MB vendor and tell them the >problem you are having. At that point both MS and the vendor will have to bump heads >and decide what the problem is and how to fix it. C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 1:53 pm Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) I will do some checking, as none of the board makers are posting problems. So far it's known that Asus, Abit and Soyo have had problems as well as some others but I don't have a complete list. You almost have to have "inside" knowledge. What revision of board do you have and what program are you using for your application and rendering? I have some programs that are supposed to work on SMP systems but are not optimised for SMP, so they exhibit the same problems that you describe. I have some applications that are optimised and have far less problems. There are also problems with other applications /services that can inhibit the proper operation of programs which the operating system is powerless to prevent so this falls to the respective vendor to correct their code. You can email me directly from this forum if you want.. Might be faster.. C K On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 12:52 pm, M P wrote: >Ok CK... >I have a Tyan ThunderBolt running dual P3 850, 2gigs of ram, 640 gigs of HD space >using scsi and ide drives and a DVD-Ram and a DVD-R burner. I am currently experiencing >sys idle process slowdown. For some reason, it starts using both processors, running >at 92-96% during rendering and after about 10 minutes, one drops off and I only get >around 55% of total processor power. I tried rebooting and it happened again but >this time, the other processor dropped off after about 10 minutes. One time I let >it render for about 4 hours under 50% and then all of the sudden, the other processor >kicked in giving me back my 98%!!! What goes here?? >I have upgraded the sys bios to the current, checked for newer drivers and installed, >switched to a 530watt power supply, changed the processor heatsink fans, (this case >has 13 fans throughout) so heat isn't the factor, I would assume. Your insight would >be greatly appreciated. >Thanks, M P > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 2:29 pm Posted by M P (3 messages posted) The Tyan MB is a 440GX AGPset with Amibios. I'm using Adobe Premiere 5.0 for video rendering. I've installed the latest patch but that didn't help the problem. Someone once described this to be a "threading" problem but his explanation was way over my head. Maybe you would know something about this. Thanks again... M P On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 1:53 pm, ckrokit wrote: >I will do some checking, as none of the board makers are posting problems. So far >it's known that Asus, Abit and Soyo have had problems as well as some others but >I don't have a complete list. You almost have to have "inside" knowledge. What >revision of board do you have and what program are you using for your application >and rendering? I have some programs that are supposed to work on SMP systems but >are not optimised for SMP, so they exhibit the same problems that you describe. >I have some applications that are optimised and have far less problems. There are >also problems with other applications /services that can inhibit the proper operation >of programs which the operating system is powerless to prevent so this falls to the >respective vendor to correct their code. You can email me directly from this forum >if you want.. Might be faster.. C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 3:23 pm Posted by Clifford (3 messages posted) EPoX 8KTA w/1GHz Athlon. Latest VIA 4in1 and media drivers, 512MB RAM. Have downloaded but not installed latest BIOS upgrade since release notes were minimal (only describing changes in latest revision), and I think caution is called for in these things! On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 9:12 am, ckrokit wrote: >What are your system specs? Specifically the motherboard manufacturer and model. > Some motherboards have incompatibilities and have had to require replacement or >be returned to the manufacturer for modification. This has happened to me. In some >cases, a BIOS upgrade can be done to fix it. There were MB's identified by MS and >the vendors to be a problem. If you have one of those boards, the problem was that >their design was not completed for the final ACPI spec. In some boards the CPU usage >is being incorrectly reported. This can either involve a fix from MS or can be a >design problem in the motherboard which can not be fixed and involves installing >the Standard PC Hal which disables the ACPI. If it is a motherboard problem, you >will find that what works in NT 4, does not work in Win 2000 and XP. As I have written >before in this forum, the system idle process is also incorporated in other OP systems, >incuding MAC OS X, Linux, etc. If any of you have used software CPU coolers for >Win 9X, this is essentially all a software cooler is. It just adds the system idle >process. To date in all of the systems I have worked on (thousands of them), hardware >has been the cause for reported problems in the system idle process and high idle >CPU usage/sluggish response. Anybody having problems, send your specs to me and >I will research it for you. I am trying to compile a list of hardware that seems >to be causing this problem in 2000 and XP. As I said, if everything works OK in >NT4, and your CPU usage hangs high (30-60% while idle) under 2000 XP, (check it before >any other software is installed) expect that you have a hardware problem and I suspect >that your MB is 2 to 3 or more years older. If it is a new motherboard, (which I >haven't seen any to date) you may have to contact the MB vendor and tell them the >problem you are having. At that point both MS and the vendor will have to bump heads >and decide what the problem is and how to fix it. C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 4:57 pm Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) I sort of knew you were going to say Adobe and that the threading issue would come up. Just had not had time to post back. It is complicated to say the least and trying to sort it out takes a fairly high level of experience/tech knowledge to trouble shoot the problems that it can cause. It is consiquently a programming issue more to do with third party programs than with the OP system unfortunatly. Don't know if this will help or if you can follow it or not but it may shed some light on the threading issue. Was written for 2000 but applies to XP as well. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechnol/windows2000pro/reskit/part6/proch29.asp Judging by your system specs, you have a loaded system and then some. Unfortunatly this can be part of the problem even for an SMP machine. I have found that a machine which has had all but the necessary hardware and software removed, will do faster rendering and make use of the processing power better. I have my machines connected by a 10-100-1000 network so that finished files can be transfered to other machines when the rendering is done. I hate to say it but no one has as of yet made and affordable all-in-one machine to handle these types of operations. :-( Your MB isn't one of the MB's that have had any known issues, at least that I can find so far. Will keep checking though. Also checking on some resources that can explain the threading issue a little better. C K On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 2:29 pm, M P wrote: >The Tyan MB is a 440GX AGPset with Amibios. I'm using Adobe Premiere 5.0 for video >rendering. I've installed the latest patch but that didn't help the problem. Someone >once described this to be a "threading" problem but his explanation was way over >my head. Maybe you would know something about this. >Thanks again... M P > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 8:57 pm Posted by M P (3 messages posted) Hey C K.. Thanks for your help and time to write back so soon. I would have kept in touch but I had to watch the Niners/Raiders game. lol... Anyway, I'm taking your advice on ripping out all the unnecessary hardware and streamlining my system. I do need the gigs so I'll install them on another computer as storage. If you do come up with a solution, either place it in here or send to my email addy. Again.. thanks for you help. Oh.. btw.. I am running Win2000pro as my OS. M P On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 4:57 pm, ckrokit wrote: >I sort of knew you were going to say Adobe and that the threading issue would come >up. Just had not had time to post back. It is complicated to say the least and >trying to sort it out takes a fairly high level of experience/tech knowledge to trouble >shoot the problems that it can cause. It is consiquently a programming issue more >to do with third party programs than with the OP system unfortunatly. Don't know >if this will help or if you can follow it or not but it may shed some light on the >threading issue. Was written for 2000 but applies to XP as well. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechnol/windows2000pro/reskit/part6/proch29.asp > Judging by your system specs, you have a loaded system and then some. Unfortunatly >this can be part of the problem even for an SMP machine. I have found that a machine >which has had all but the necessary hardware and software removed, will do faster >rendering and make use of the processing power better. I have my machines connected >by a 10-100-1000 network so that finished files can be transfered to other machines >when the rendering is done. I hate to say it but no one has as of yet made and affordable >all-in-one machine to handle these types of operations. :-( Your MB isn't one of >the MB's that have had any known issues, at least that I can find so far. Will keep >checking though. Also checking on some resources that can explain the threading >issue a little better. C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Monday, November 4, 2002 at 10:20 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) No problem. I will keep checking.. I also run 2000 for some tasks (swappable HD bays). I make sure that all unnecessary services are turned off and that nothing like virus software is installed. Those types of software really impact on the processing. You can play around with the threading priority but most of the time it doesn't work or help all that much. Have you checked out blkviper.com for a rundown on the services and which ones can be turned off when you don't need them? That will make a difference too. Adobe Premier, Photoshop and Pro Tools thread very well on my system (modified Asus P2B-DS with dual P3-600 overclocked 1 gig RAM) so I would say something else is causing a problem in your system, either a driver or software. Just a process of elimination unfortunatly. Let me know how it goes. I'm always curious and eager to learn about what works and what doesn't. C K :-) On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 8:57 pm, M P wrote: >Hey C K.. >Thanks for your help and time to write back so soon. I would have kept in touch >but I had to watch the Niners/Raiders game. lol... Anyway, I'm taking your advice >on ripping out all the unnecessary hardware and streamlining my system. I do need >the gigs so I'll install them on another computer as storage. If you do come up >with a solution, either place it in here or send to my email addy. Again.. thanks >for you help. >Oh.. btw.. I am running Win2000pro as my OS. >M P > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Monday, November 4, 2002 at 10:56 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) Ahh.. The old VIA chipset. Have heard more complaints on the VIA chipset than any other. Depending on the chipset (133/266), they have turned off the HALT command to the processor which is making the processors run hotter and consume more power and I'm not exactly sure yet how this is effecting the system idle process. I will post more about this later today or tomorrow and what people are doing to re-enable the command (due to design, there can be side effects though). There are some tools on the VIA website but I haven't had a chance to look yet. I've also found that where there are reported problems with the system idle process, there have been some incompatibilities in both hardware and software that can cause a loop. The idle process is the simplest process there is in the system so it's pretty rare that it doesn't work right, but it does happen. I will post more later when I get back. Personally though, after having so many problems with VIA chipsets, I only buy boards that have Intel or the new SIS sets. Have had far fewer problems and compatibility issues. C K On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 3:23 pm, Clifford wrote: >EPoX 8KTA w/1GHz Athlon. Latest VIA 4in1 and media drivers, 512MB RAM. Have downloaded >but not installed latest BIOS upgrade since release notes were minimal (only describing >changes in latest revision), and I think caution is called for in these things! > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Monday, November 4, 2002 at 2:22 pm Posted by Orlando (1 messages posted) I have a 850 P3, 512MB Ram, geforce 3. I have recently got this problem about 2 days ago. After re-installing windows xp (I have been using it with out no problems since it was released) because of a vicious virus ( I THINK) or what ever it was it disable my firewall and antivirus, could not re-activate was locked out. There is something constantly running on my machine even when i am not running anything. In the task manager a get applications jumping up and down. Need help, if i cannot fix problem i guess i will have revert to windows 2000 as it had less crap running in the background. On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 3:23 pm, Clifford wrote: >EPoX 8KTA w/1GHz Athlon. Latest VIA 4in1 and media drivers, 512MB RAM. Have downloaded >but not installed latest BIOS upgrade since release notes were minimal (only describing >changes in latest revision), and I think caution is called for in these things! > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Monday, November 4, 2002 at 10:09 pm Posted by The Mish (2 messages posted) Here's another one: Iwill BD100 PII 400MHz 128MB RAM Matrox Productiva G100 SoundBlaster 64 PCI running Windows XP. For me, the problem only occurs when I run Sonic Foundry's Sound Forge 4.5d or 4.5h. I don't have any other versions to test it with. In addition, a computer at my work: Pentium Pro 180 (!) 196MB RAM running Win2K (other specs I don't remember) also exhibits the the problem ONLY when running Sound Forge. Reinstalling Win2K helped for awhile, only to have the problem occur again a time later. I reinstalled the OS again... So far it works. It always seemed to me to be more of a software problem rather than something directly linked to the hardware, but I could be wrong. -The Mish On Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 6:37 am, Sabrina wrote: >Does anyone know if I can disable this or why it's taking so much of my CPU? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Monday, November 4, 2002 at 10:21 pm Posted by The Mish (2 messages posted) Sabrina et al., I was just checking out a few options on my machine, and when I made the virtual paging file a custom size instead of allowing the "System managed size," my only program that gave me problems, Sound Forge, worked absolutely perfectly! Try it on your system, and let us know if that solves your problem. It might just be that for all of us who are running larger programs, such as the video renderer guy, my sound editing, and the others, the system can't manage it's own paging file and handle the huge memory request that is being made of it. Maybe page file fragmentation has something to do with it? Try it out, and let's see if this or something related to this is the solution to the problem. For those who don't know, the System Paging option in XP is found by: Right-clicking on "My Computer," Advanced Tab, Performance Settings Button, Advanced Tab, Change Virtual Memory Button, Custom Size Radio Button. I made my paging file 500MB. (Sometimes I wish for a CLI in Windows! Too much mousing around!) On Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 6:37 am, Sabrina wrote: >Does anyone know if I can disable this or why it's taking so much of my CPU? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Wednesday, November 6, 2002 at 11:38 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) What is your MB spec and chipset? Just curious as there seem to be certian manufacturers and chipset numbers causing more problems than others. C K On Monday, November 4, 2002 at 2:22 pm, Orlando wrote: >I have a 850 P3, 512MB Ram, geforce 3. I have recently got this problem about 2 days >ago. After re-installing windows xp (I have been using it with out no problems since >it was released) because of a vicious virus ( I THINK) or what ever it was it disable >my firewall and antivirus, could not re-activate was locked out. There is something >constantly running on my machine even when i am not running anything. In the task >manager a get applications jumping up and down. Need help, if i cannot fix problem >i guess i will have revert to windows 2000 as it had less crap running in the background. > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Wednesday, November 6, 2002 at 11:40 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) Check out my last post to MP. Follow the link on threading. If you understand basic computer and advanced issues on computer technology, it may answer some questions on what you are experiencing with SF. I also use some Sonic Foundry programs and find that they take much more computing power than the stated minimum to fuction correctly and work best on an SMP machine. Setting the page file to a static setting helps as it reduces the load on the processor. It is an indication that a slower processor gets "overloaded" or bottlenecks in the system starve the processor. To bad that you don't have an SMP machine with double the RAM. It would be a night and day difference. I have an old P2-300 (512 mb RAM) MX 400 video SMP XP Pro machine that runs the Sonic Foundry programs amazingly well. It really gets messy sometimes trying to find problems but there are tools to find and determine what needs to be done in a particular machine. Overall, I still have the best stable performance on my BX chipset. I've worked on and had all kinds of problems on the newer chipsets and especially ones from VIA. Most of the time, it is software causing the problems, but hardware can be at fault depending on the vendor and specs. C K On Monday, November 4, 2002 at 10:09 pm, The Mish wrote: >Here's another one: >Iwill BD100 >PII 400MHz >128MB RAM >Matrox Productiva G100 >SoundBlaster 64 PCI >running Windows XP. > >For me, the problem only occurs when I run Sonic Foundry's Sound Forge 4.5d or 4.5h. > > >I don't have any other versions to test it with. > >In addition, a computer at my work: >Pentium Pro 180 (!) >196MB RAM >running Win2K >(other specs I don't remember) > >also exhibits the the problem ONLY when running Sound Forge. Reinstalling Win2K >helped for awhile, only to have the problem occur again a time later. I reinstalled >the OS again... So far it works. > >It always seemed to me to be more of a software problem rather than something directly >linked to the hardware, but I could be wrong. > >-The Mish > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Wednesday, November 6, 2002 at 1:11 pm Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) I found the follow utility and have been using it on an Asus A7M-266 (AMD 761 NB and VIA SB, XP Home) has reduced my normal system CPU temp by 7 degrees C. Check it out. Very interesting concerning the chipsets and AMD cpu's. If you try it, let me know how it works. http://vcool.occludo.net/ On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 3:23 pm, Clifford wrote: >EPoX 8KTA w/1GHz Athlon. Latest VIA 4in1 and media drivers, 512MB RAM. Have downloaded >but not installed latest BIOS upgrade since release notes were minimal (only describing >changes in latest revision), and I think caution is called for in these things! > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Saturday, November 9, 2002 at 1:21 am Posted by Brittnell (1 messages posted) Interesting thread... I just now started experiencing this problem (while formating a secondary drive via "Disk Manager"), and was so startled by my systems performance hit that I immediately went out hunting for an answer (normally, this system's pretty "rockin"). It's not the first time I've formatted a drive, but it's the first time I've ever seen this sort of behavior (System Idle Process at CPU 97%, refresh on web pages such as this - excrutiantingly slow, typing feels like it's in quicksand). I recently reinstalled my OS (Win2k SP3), and updated the bios on my MoBo (Abit VP6), but had been running the new setup for several weeks without encountering this (and, prior to this latest reinstall/update, I have never seen this issue on this machine, which I've been running for about 18 months). I'm going to try the Virtual Paging File tip mentioned elsewhere in the thread, but if any other info comes up regarding this, I'd live to know (It's very disconcerting). Cheers, Brittnell --- SYSTEM SPECS --- W2K (SP3) --- Abit VP6 (bios YT) --- Dual PIII 1Ghz --- 2Gb SDRAM --- Elsa Gloria III --- Terratec DMX 6Fire --- DX 8.1b --- IBM Deskstar 60GXP x1 --- IBM Deskstar 75GXP x1 --- Adaptec 21960 (3.10.0) --- IBM DDYS-T36950 (36Gb/10k rpm/SCSI) x 2 --- IBM DDYS-T18350 (18Gb/10k rpm/SCSI) x1 --- Ps. not sure if it's related, but I do use 3DS Max 5.0, Adobe Premiere, and Sound Forge 6.0 (I saw these mentioned earlier in the thread). [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Saturday, November 9, 2002 at 1:40 am Posted by Clifford (3 messages posted) In the end, I flashed the BIOS and the problem is solved! Now the system idles at 1-2% CPU usage, and is much more responsive. Also I used SiSoft Sandra to analyse the system, and followed its recommendations on which services could be switched from automatic to manual (or demand). Clifford On Monday, November 4, 2002 at 10:56 am, ckrokit wrote: >Ahh.. The old VIA chipset. Have heard more complaints on the VIA chipset than any >other. Depending on the chipset (133/266), they have turned off the HALT command >to the processor which is making the processors run hotter and consume more power >and I'm not exactly sure yet how this is effecting the system idle process. I will >post more about this later today or tomorrow and what people are doing to re-enable >the command (due to design, there can be side effects though). There are some tools >on the VIA website but I haven't had a chance to look yet. I've also found that >where there are reported problems with the system idle process, there have been some >incompatibilities in both hardware and software that can cause a loop. The idle process >is the simplest process there is in the system so it's pretty rare that it doesn't >work right, but it does happen. I will post more later when I get back. Personally >though, after having so many problems with VIA chipsets, I only buy boards that have >Intel or the new SIS sets. Have had far fewer problems and compatibility issues. > C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Saturday, November 9, 2002 at 10:06 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) Glad to hear it.. I bet everyone else wishes it was that simple for them! C K On Saturday, November 9, 2002 at 1:40 am, Clifford wrote: >In the end, I flashed the BIOS and the problem is solved! Now the system idles at >1-2% CPU usage, and is much more responsive. > >Also I used SiSoft Sandra to analyse the system, and followed its recommendations >on which services could be switched from automatic to manual (or demand). > >Clifford > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Friday, November 22, 2002 at 8:44 am Posted by shawn (1 messages posted) I have the following system: Dell Dimension 550 MHZ P III - 256 MB RAM Windows XP Omni Studio Sound Card (Delta 66) Midi Keyboard. When I record one guitar track the CPU usage is fine. When I play this back and plug in my USB Midi controller CPU usage spikes in the red and I get constant audio dropout. I have the latest drivers for everything. I've "tinkered" with my buffer sizes and latency to the best of my ability. I recently saw the System idle process being used in my task manager. I don't know the manufactuer of the MB, but I beleive the chips are intel. Do you think upgrading to a Maxtor HD with 7200 RPMs and 8MB transfer this will cure the problem or will my 550 mhz processer limit this? On Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 6:37 am, Sabrina wrote: >Does anyone know if I can disable this or why it's taking so much of my CPU? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Monday, November 25, 2002 at 12:10 pm Posted by Wim Kotze (3 messages posted) hello CK, I'm sending you my specs. I'd be very thankful if you can check it out - good luck with your research anyway. I am using an LG with AMD Duron processor (1 GHz) with 128Mb RAM on XP. I am experiencing a classic System Idle process slowdown, as described by other users on this forum (around 75% idling, 95-100% when opening a new page or folder in explorer or iexplore.exe). I installed XP upon purchase, the disk is not fragmented, and to the best of my knowledge virus free. I played around with paging options, "best performance" options etc but to no avail. I've had my pc since February. Allthough I'm pretty sure this pc has never been quick (my similar spec pc at work is only using 4% CPU on idling, with loads of open applications!) I am not certain how much the problem has actually gotten worse, if it has. Do you think this is hardware? Any ideas? regards Wim On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 9:12 am, ckrokit wrote: >What are your system specs? Specifically the motherboard manufacturer and model. > Some motherboards have incompatibilities and have had to require replacement or >be returned to the manufacturer for modification. This has happened to me. In some >cases, a BIOS upgrade can be done to fix it. There were MB's identified by MS and >the vendors to be a problem. If you have one of those boards, the problem was that >their design was not completed for the final ACPI spec. In some boards the CPU usage >is being incorrectly reported. This can either involve a fix from MS or can be a >design problem in the motherboard which can not be fixed and involves installing >the Standard PC Hal which disables the ACPI. If it is a motherboard problem, you >will find that what works in NT 4, does not work in Win 2000 and XP. As I have written >before in this forum, the system idle process is also incorporated in other OP systems, >incuding MAC OS X, Linux, etc. If any of you have used software CPU coolers for >Win 9X, this is essentially all a software cooler is. It just adds the system idle >process. To date in all of the systems I have worked on (thousands of them), hardware >has been the cause for reported problems in the system idle process and high idle >CPU usage/sluggish response. Anybody having problems, send your specs to me and >I will research it for you. I am trying to compile a list of hardware that seems >to be causing this problem in 2000 and XP. As I said, if everything works OK in >NT4, and your CPU usage hangs high (30-60% while idle) under 2000 XP, (check it before >any other software is installed) expect that you have a hardware problem and I suspect >that your MB is 2 to 3 or more years older. If it is a new motherboard, (which I >haven't seen any to date) you may have to contact the MB vendor and tell them the >problem you are having. At that point both MS and the vendor will have to bump heads >and decide what the problem is and how to fix it. C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Monday, November 25, 2002 at 9:46 pm Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) Hi.. It's been a very active thread to say the least. I have found some very interesting things on some boards/systems but got stalled due too work etc. First, when your CPU is showing 75% load, what does your system idle process show? If a constant of 75% cpu load, the systems idle process should be around 25% or so. If it is higher by 5% or more for example, then you have some hardware or software issues going on or an overlaoded system that may be weak on resources. Take a look at all of the processes to see what they show. Is the system idle process low and the CPU load high? If this is the case, the process hogging the CPU time is the culprit. If you haven't already, check out blkviper.com for a look at what services you may be able to shut down to reduce the load. Then check which applications are running and try shutting down the ones that are using a higher percentage of CPU time and see if that helps. There have been reports of some errors in XP/2000 where the load and idle process are being incorrectly reported but it seems to effect the same type of board in differant ways. That makes no sense unless we take into consideration processor differences and other hardware/software issues but no one can say for sure right now. What chipset does your MB have on it?? There are some chipset issues going on as I speak. So far I have found that I have to check the system idle process as soon as XP is installed. That way, no other software will cause conflicts and I can see immediately if there is a hardware/OP system problem. So far I have seen it mostly on AMD systems with certian chipsets, but not all chipset/MB/processor combos. Some of the newer boards require BIOS updates and some need them but they haven't been released yet or they may have some design problems. Wouldn't be the first time. I also noticed that you have only 128 meg of RAM. This is actually low enough to cause problems of a high amount of disk read/writes to the drive and has nothing to do with how big/small your VM is or if it is defragged (the system is actually getting choked). You very well might see a large improvement by adding at least another 128 meg of RAM if you can afford it. MS really should have told people that 256 was the recommended minimum. As I have stated previously, I have found the old BX chipsets doing better than the new ones unfortunately on the compatibilty issues and stability.. Post the model of your MB and I will check it out.. C K On Monday, November 25, 2002 at 12:10 pm, Wim Kotze wrote: >hello CK, > >I'm sending you my specs. I'd be very thankful if you can check it out - good luck >with your research anyway. > >I am using an LG with AMD Duron processor (1 GHz) with 128Mb RAM on XP. I am experiencing >a classic System Idle process slowdown, as described by other users on this forum >(around 75% idling, 95-100% when opening a new page or folder in explorer or iexplore.exe). >I installed XP upon purchase, the disk is not fragmented, and to the best of my knowledge >virus free. I played around with paging options, "best performance" options etc but >to no avail. I've had my pc since February. Allthough I'm pretty sure this pc has >never been quick (my similar spec pc at work is only using 4% CPU on idling, with >loads of open applications!) I am not certain how much the problem has actually gotten >worse, if it has. > >Do you think this is hardware? Any ideas? > >regards > >Wim > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Wednesday, November 27, 2002 at 1:49 pm Posted by Wim Kotze (3 messages posted) CK, hi again..Thanks for your reply.Excuse my ignorance, but actually identifying my motherboard based on the startup information turned out to be quite a mission. I hope I've got it right. - It seems I have a EPOX kt-133M+ motherboard (chipset?) (based on a search of my award bios no 8363-686B-6a6LMPADC-00) - thats with an AMD Duron 1GHz processor and 128Mb RAM - I have visited blkviper.com but not much has changed after following all recommendations - I am willing spend the money to double my RAM if I'm convinced that it will solve the whole problem, but I would like to tackle the main cause first. - The system idle process is around 50% when the CPU reports 75% (which is, incidentally, all of the time). - my pc at work, with similar software (and more) and the same RAM and CPU, but with windows 2000, rarely idles at more than 2%. It would be a very, very happy day when I know what steps to take to solve the problem..Do you think I might need to upgrade my MB? thanks & regards Wim On Monday, November 25, 2002 at 9:46 pm, ckrokit wrote: >Hi.. It's been a very active thread to say the least. I have found some very interesting >things on some boards/systems but got stalled due too work etc. First, when your >CPU is showing 75% load, what does your system idle process show? If a constant >of 75% cpu load, the systems idle process should be around 25% or so. If it is higher >by 5% or more for example, then you have some hardware or software issues going on >or an overlaoded system that may be weak on resources. Take a look at all of the >processes to see what they show. Is the system idle process low and the CPU load >high? If this is the case, the process hogging the CPU time is the culprit. If >you haven't already, check out blkviper.com for a look at what services you may be >able to shut down to reduce the load. Then check which applications are running >and try shutting down the ones that are using a higher percentage of CPU time and >see if that helps. There have been reports of some errors in XP/2000 where the load >and idle process are being incorrectly reported but it seems to effect the same type >of board in differant ways. That makes no sense unless we take into consideration >processor differences and other hardware/software issues but no one can say for sure >right now. What chipset does your MB have on it?? There are some chipset issues >going on as I speak. So far I have found that I have to check the system idle process >as soon as XP is installed. That way, no other software will cause conflicts and >I can see immediately if there is a hardware/OP system problem. So far I have seen >it mostly on AMD systems with certian chipsets, but not all chipset/MB/processor >combos. Some of the newer boards require BIOS updates and some need them but they >haven't been released yet or they may have some design problems. Wouldn't be the >first time. I also noticed that you have only 128 meg of RAM. This is actually >low enough to cause problems of a high amount of disk read/writes to the drive and >has nothing to do with how big/small your VM is or if it is defragged (the system >is actually getting choked). You very well might see a large improvement by adding >at least another 128 meg of RAM if you can afford it. MS really should have told >people that 256 was the recommended minimum. As I have stated previously, I have >found the old BX chipsets doing better than the new ones unfortunately on the compatibilty >issues and stability.. Post the model of your MB and I will check it out.. C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Thursday, November 28, 2002 at 9:59 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) I'll check your MB on the vendors web site for the chipset. If your CPU shows 75% the idle process should be around 25%. Win 2000 and XP are the same and they are different. XP is more resource hungry so it needs more RAM than did 2000. Either way adding ram will help so you wouldn't be throwing your money away unless you upgrade MB's which may take different memory. I have 1 gig of RAM in all of my machines and the Virtual Memory is turned off. It makes a huge difference in performance. To date, in video and audio editing, I've yet to have a problem with not enough memory. I've posted before that XP Pro works much better on a dual processor system. A majority of the problems I see are on more recent uni-processor systems, and some older systems where the ACPI spec wasn't fully implemented correctly. (Hmm.. I wonder why, does MS want us all to run SMP machines??) Take a look at the other running processes. Another process with a high time number is also hogging CPU time. I would be curious to know what they show. I assume you have checked for a BIOS update? Sorry, if you already answered that one but I don't recall off hand.. If you can identify a process that is running a lot of time, that would be at least part of the source of the problem. If not, there could be a hardware or driver issue going on. There would be an outside chance that XP has some problems with your hardware. I am still suspicous of a bottle neck in the system but I would have to run some physical tests to be sure. There are some reports of some versions of a certian MB having problems. I have in my archive somewhere some info that may help identify system bottlenecks, I'll dig it up and post it when I get a chance. Let me know what you find.. Incidently, if you ever want to copy anything off the bootup screen, just hit the "Pause-Break" key, then "Enter-Return" key to continue booting. This should work on every PC.. C K On Wednesday, November 27, 2002 at 1:49 pm, Wim Kotze wrote: >CK, > >hi again..Thanks for your reply.Excuse my ignorance, but actually identifying my >motherboard based on the startup information turned out to be quite a mission. I >hope I've got it right. >- It seems I have a EPOX kt-133M+ motherboard (chipset?) (based on a search of my >award bios no 8363-686B-6a6LMPADC-00) - thats with an AMD Duron 1GHz processor and >128Mb RAM >- I have visited blkviper.com but not much has changed after following all recommendations >- I am willing spend the money to double my RAM if I'm convinced that it will solve >the whole problem, but I would like to tackle the main cause first. >- The system idle process is around 50% when the CPU reports 75% (which is, incidentally, >all of the time). >- my pc at work, with similar software (and more) and the same RAM and CPU, but with >windows 2000, rarely idles at more than 2%. > >It would be a very, very happy day when I know what steps to take to solve the problem..Do >you think I might need to upgrade my MB? > >thanks & regards > >Wim > > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Friday, December 6, 2002 at 2:30 am Posted by Wim Kotze (3 messages posted) hi CK (and everybody) - The culprit seems to be my external ISDN modem (I'll check out to see whether it is actually the modem or the USB port). If the port is not connected, the system idles at 0% - 2% CPU, if connected, it shoots up to around 75%. (By the way, in response to your question, no other processes show CPU usage other than zero). I have a "Duxbury" 128000 BPS ISDN TA modem. I wonder if anybody else is also experiencing a problem like this. While the problem has not been solved yet, at least I know now that I can have proper performance if I boot up without my modem. CK thanks for your time spent on advice. Wim On Thursday, November 28, 2002 at 9:59 am, ckrokit wrote: >I'll check your MB on the vendors web site for the chipset. If your CPU shows 75% >the idle process should be around 25%. Win 2000 and XP are the same and they are >different. XP is more resource hungry so it needs more RAM than did 2000. Either >way adding ram will help so you wouldn't be throwing your money away unless you upgrade >MB's which may take different memory. I have 1 gig of RAM in all of my machines >and the Virtual Memory is turned off. It makes a huge difference in performance. > To date, in video and audio editing, I've yet to have a problem with not enough >memory. I've posted before that XP Pro works much better on a dual processor system. > A majority of the problems I see are on more recent uni-processor systems, and some >older systems where the ACPI spec wasn't fully implemented correctly. (Hmm.. I >wonder why, does MS want us all to run SMP machines??) Take a look at the other >running processes. Another process with a high time number is also hogging CPU time. > I would be curious to know what they show. I assume you have checked for a BIOS >update? Sorry, if you already answered that one but I don't recall off hand.. If >you can identify a process that is running a lot of time, that would be at least >part of the source of the problem. If not, there could be a hardware or driver issue >going on. There would be an outside chance that XP has some problems with your hardware. > I am still suspicous of a bottle neck in the system but I would have to run some >physical tests to be sure. There are some reports of some versions of a certian >MB having problems. I have in my archive somewhere some info that may help identify >system bottlenecks, I'll dig it up and post it when I get a chance. Let me know >what you find.. Incidently, if you ever want to copy anything off the bootup screen, >just hit the "Pause-Break" key, then "Enter-Return" key to continue booting. This >should work on every PC.. C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Friday, December 6, 2002 at 9:32 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) This has become quite a thread hey?? That's exactly what we are finding out. Nintey five percent of the time, it can attributed to hardware or drivers and occasionally to bad programs. Glad to hear you have identified the source. It could also be a problem in the modem driver or the USB drivers. I'm keeping track of as many items as possible. Some games are so CPU intensive that they will also use 100% if the CPU time or at least all that they can get. Good Luck to every one and the following advice is what we use to identify the problem.. Sometimes you have to go through a process of elimination and it is better to do this before any software is installed on a new XP install. This way you can start pulling any add-on hardware and eliminate drivers to see what happens. If you get down to just the MB and graphics card and switching graphics cards doesn't do it, you know you have a problem on the MB. Sometimes it will need a BIOS update and sometimes the MB will have problem that can't be fixed. It is then time to switch to a different MB, hopefully a different manufacturer or model number known not to have a problem. Don't be afraid to let the vendor know either! That's the way problems get fixed on the hardware and in the software. C K :-) On Friday, December 6, 2002 at 2:30 am, Wim Kotze wrote: >hi CK (and everybody) >- The culprit seems to be my external ISDN modem (I'll check out to see whether it >is actually the modem or the USB port). If the port is not connected, the system >idles at 0% - 2% CPU, if connected, it shoots up to around 75%. (By the way, in response >to your question, no other processes show CPU usage other than zero). >I have a "Duxbury" 128000 BPS ISDN TA modem. I wonder if anybody else is also experiencing >a problem like this. While the problem has not been solved yet, at least I know now >that I can have proper performance if I boot up without my modem. >CK thanks for your time spent on advice. >Wim > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Wednesday, January 15, 2003 at 9:45 am Posted by Simon (1 messages posted) Hey Orlando I got a dell dimension with geforce 3, i had the exact same virus it ruined most of my drivers and destroyed my antivirus after this i decided to reinstall xp and after reinstalling and formatting my hard drive it suddenly began terrorizing me with a cpu speed of 95-97 % the whole time, my screen also hangs when i slide down in iexplorer. I think this might have something do with reinstalling windows xp. PLease help Me get RId of IT fast! On Monday, November 4, 2002 at 2:22 pm, Orlando wrote: >I have a 850 P3, 512MB Ram, geforce 3. I have recently got this problem about 2 days >ago. After re-installing windows xp (I have been using it with out no problems since >it was released) because of a vicious virus ( I THINK) or what ever it was it disable >my firewall and antivirus, could not re-activate was locked out. There is something >constantly running on my machine even when i am not running anything. In the task >manager a get applications jumping up and down. Need help, if i cannot fix problem >i guess i will have revert to windows 2000 as it had less crap running in the background. > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Saturday, May 17, 2003 at 11:10 pm Posted by Trent Sherman (3 messages posted) Okay..I'm going to burst everyone's theories right now because I would love a cure, not a theory. Case in point: I've been operating WinXP Pro for over 6th months, NEVER having such a problem with my AMD 955MHz PC, 256MB Ram, 60 GB Drive. What peripherals I have attached are irrelevant. And I've been using a Bellsouth ADSL Speedtouch (USB) modem for over a year "with" software upgrades .. with absolutely no problems. When I upgraded to SP1 Service Pack, and..in addition..after downloading drivers that the winupdate site detected, then (and ONLY THEN) did I start having troubles. Has nothing to do with chip bios upgrades, hardware conflicts or what type of computer your using. Let's kill that part of the thread right now. In the system process menu the following two processes need examining real closely: "winupdmng" and "system idle process". Please note.. Although a person can check off the box that allows you to disable Windows from retrieving Windows Updates, it still loads "winupdmng" upon each system startup anyways..have you noticed that? I have NEVER noticed a process called "WINUPDMNG" until AFTER I installed the SP1 Package from Microsoft. Let's start checking out this theory for a while and drop the others. I couldn't stand in the background any further, watching all these guesses. I'm speaking from experience from having Win Xp Pro for a while now, having a ADSL modem for a while and never having troubles until after Microsoft's REQUIREMENT to have the SP1 Package installed, else nothing would allow us to have further downloads/updates from them. Let me know how everyone does and what they find out. Thanks so much! Trent Sherman orderonline@bellsouth.net [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Friday, July 4, 2003 at 9:15 pm Posted by chris (1 messages posted) I've seen questions asked such as, why is my system idle process under Windows Task Manager at 99% when I'm doing nothing with the system?" or Because it's at such high percentage, isn't this slowing my system down? Well, that's quite normal. This is a HLT command that Windows 2000 or Windows XP will send when the system is at idle. This feature is basically the same thing that occurs when you use CPUIdle (CPU Cooling Software). This process is activated when the system is at idle to keep the processor at cooler temperatures. You will see that the number drops when you begin to use the system. This does not take away your processor power. As you can see in the picture below, although the System Idle Process is showing a number of 99, but the actual CPU Usage is at 1%. On Sunday, November 3, 2002 at 9:12 am, ckrokit wrote: >What are your system specs? Specifically the motherboard manufacturer and model. > Some motherboards have incompatibilities and have had to require replacement or >be returned to the manufacturer for modification. This has happened to me. In some >cases, a BIOS upgrade can be done to fix it. There were MB's identified by MS and >the vendors to be a problem. If you have one of those boards, the problem was that >their design was not completed for the final ACPI spec. In some boards the CPU usage >is being incorrectly reported. This can either involve a fix from MS or can be a >design problem in the motherboard which can not be fixed and involves installing >the Standard PC Hal which disables the ACPI. If it is a motherboard problem, you >will find that what works in NT 4, does not work in Win 2000 and XP. As I have written >before in this forum, the system idle process is also incorporated in other OP systems, >incuding MAC OS X, Linux, etc. If any of you have used software CPU coolers for >Win 9X, this is essentially all a software cooler is. It just adds the system idle >process. To date in all of the systems I have worked on (thousands of them), hardware >has been the cause for reported problems in the system idle process and high idle >CPU usage/sluggish response. Anybody having problems, send your specs to me and >I will research it for you. I am trying to compile a list of hardware that seems >to be causing this problem in 2000 and XP. As I said, if everything works OK in >NT4, and your CPU usage hangs high (30-60% while idle) under 2000 XP, (check it before >any other software is installed) expect that you have a hardware problem and I suspect >that your MB is 2 to 3 or more years older. If it is a new motherboard, (which I >haven't seen any to date) you may have to contact the MB vendor and tell them the >problem you are having. At that point both MS and the vendor will have to bump heads >and decide what the problem is and how to fix it. C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Saturday, July 5, 2003 at 2:52 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) This sure become a lively thread. All of my observations and facts about hardware are just that, FACTS! I can search through the MS KB and find the articles concerning some motherboards having incompatibilities. As I have posted before, the system idle process is normal and indicates the amount of processor power NOT being used or the "IDLE" time of the processor. This is a process that is integrated into at least NT 4 and later. It halts the processor when there is no work to be done, thus, saving power and cooling the processor. Win 9X systems do not have this built in, hence, the reason that software was sold that did just this, HALT the processor for the cooling effect. I personally and professionally have had to return certian motherboards for replacement from Asus which had problems that effected the system idle process. I believe it was Abit and Soyo that needed a BIOS update to solve the problem. What versions of Pro are you using? If it is a corporate version, I can't tell you why you have the winupdmng service as I have both retail and OEM versions running on 6 computers with SP 1 with all relevent updates on all 6 machines and do not have at start up, or any other time, the service you mention. A search on Google for instance and at MS doesn't turn up anything. If you are on a corporate machine, I suspect there is a service installed as a result of your corporate version of XP or of other software. So in conclusion, I hate to burst your bubble but what you have as far as winupdmng service goes, I can't identify why you may have it but is certianly not common on all machines and the system idle process is not one you have to be concerned about as it is a normal part of XP, CAN NOT be disabled and is nothing to be concerned about normally... C K On Saturday, May 17, 2003 at 11:10 pm, Trent Sherman wrote: >Okay..I'm going to burst everyone's theories right now because I would love a cure, >not a theory. Case in point: I've been operating WinXP Pro for over 6th months, >NEVER having such a problem with my AMD 955MHz PC, 256MB Ram, 60 GB Drive. What >peripherals I have attached are irrelevant. And I've been using a Bellsouth ADSL >Speedtouch (USB) modem for over a year "with" software upgrades .. with absolutely >no problems. > >When I upgraded to SP1 Service Pack, and..in addition..after downloading drivers >that the winupdate site detected, then (and ONLY THEN) did I start having troubles. > Has nothing to do with chip bios upgrades, hardware conflicts or what type of computer >your using. Let's kill that part of the thread right now. > >In the system process menu the following two processes need examining real closely: > >"winupdmng" and "system idle process". Please note.. Although a person can check >off the box that allows you to disable Windows from retrieving Windows Updates, it >still loads "winupdmng" upon each system startup anyways..have you noticed that? > >I have NEVER noticed a process called "WINUPDMNG" until AFTER I installed the SP1 >Package from Microsoft. Let's start checking out this theory for a while and drop >the others. I couldn't stand in the background any further, watching all these guesses. > I'm speaking from experience from having Win Xp Pro for a while now, having a ADSL >modem for a while and never having troubles until after Microsoft's REQUIREMENT to >have the SP1 Package installed, else nothing would allow us to have further downloads/updates >from them. Let me know how everyone does and what they find out. > >Thanks so much! > >Trent Sherman >orderonline@bellsouth.net [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, July 20, 2003 at 8:55 am Posted by Jeremy (2 messages posted) Im sorry i believe you are very knowledged but im going to have to AGREE Firmly this System Idle Issue is real and is a direct cause of the Windows Service pack download and instalation. As an experiment i Reinstalled Windows XP and then patched drivers by the maker of the device. I did not update windows at all and the problem has not returned. To test this further i then updated the windows with windows update and the problem returned later that night. I then atempted to uninstall the service pack but even after uninstalled the problem persisted. I would like to advance a theory that this is a direct result of the windows update program itself somehow. I am Open to other Ideas on how to fix this if for no other reason then not patching XP leaves you open to serious Threat of attacker intrusion. The olny other option is a conflict with a system that has run smoothly since last christmas. Im running windows XP home on a P4 1.7 with 512 DDR a gforce Ti 4200 128 mb video card SBlive soundcard i have a sony cd r - rw and a super disk drive (100 mb floppy) I connect with SURfboard sb3100 on cox cable . On Saturday, July 5, 2003 at 2:52 am, C K wrote: >This sure become a lively thread. All of my observations and facts about hardware >are just that, FACTS! I can search through the MS KB and find the articles concerning >some motherboards having incompatibilities. As I have posted before, the system >idle process is normal and indicates the amount of processor power NOT being used >or the "IDLE" time of the processor. This is a process that is integrated into at >least NT 4 and later. It halts the processor when there is no work to be done, thus, >saving power and cooling the processor. Win 9X systems do not have this built in, >hence, the reason that software was sold that did just this, HALT the processor for >the cooling effect. I personally and professionally have had to return certian motherboards >for replacement from Asus which had problems that effected the system idle process. > I believe it was Abit and Soyo that needed a BIOS update to solve the problem. >What versions of Pro are you using? If it is a corporate version, I can't tell you >why you have the winupdmng service as I have both retail and OEM versions running >on 6 computers with SP 1 with all relevent updates on all 6 machines and do not have >at start up, or any other time, the service you mention. A search on Google for >instance and at MS doesn't turn up anything. If you are on a corporate machine, >I suspect there is a service installed as a result of your corporate version of XP >or of other software. So in conclusion, I hate to burst your bubble but what you >have as far as winupdmng service goes, I can't identify why you may have it but is >certianly not common on all machines and the system idle process is not one you have >to be concerned about as it is a normal part of XP, CAN NOT be disabled and is nothing >to be concerned about normally... C K > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, July 20, 2003 at 12:07 pm Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) I'm not quite sure what you are saying here so you will have to expand on it.. You can check with the programmers from all the operating systems that use a process similar to, or the systems idle process, and you you will get the same answers. Service packs may cause problems in a number of areas but again, if you check with the programmers, you will find that the code for the idle process is less likely to blame than any other issue addressed by the services pack. I do not believe that you are knowledgeable on the system idle process code if you think that a hacker can use it to gain access to the machine. The system idle process is ONLY called into play when NO work reaches the processor and there have been very few problems actually attributed to the system idle process code itself. If you do have problems with it, I can prove that it has nothing to do with service packs. If you are going to have a problem with it (as I have on certian hardware which started in the beta releases of XP), you would have had trouble with it in previous versions of NT (again as I did) due to hardware incompatibilities or BIOS code/firmware. On Sunday, July 20, 2003 at 8:55 am, Jeremy wrote: >Im sorry i believe you are very knowledged but im going to have to AGREE Firmly this >System Idle Issue is real and is a direct cause of the Windows Service pack download >and instalation. >As an experiment i Reinstalled Windows XP and then patched drivers by the maker of >the device. >I did not update windows at all and the problem has not returned. >To test this further i then updated the windows with windows update and the problem >returned later that night. >I then atempted to uninstall the service pack but even after uninstalled the problem >persisted. >I would like to advance a theory that this is a direct result of the windows update >program itself somehow. >I am Open to other Ideas on how to fix this if for no other reason then not patching >XP leaves you open to serious Threat of attacker intrusion. >The olny other option is a conflict with a system that has run smoothly since last >christmas. >Im running windows XP home on a P4 1.7 with 512 DDR a gforce Ti 4200 128 mb video >card SBlive soundcard i have a sony cd r - rw and a super disk drive (100 mb floppy) >I connect with SURfboard sb3100 on cox cable . > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, July 20, 2003 at 5:33 pm Posted by Jeremy (2 messages posted) Im not saying the idle process is the cause of the problem. Im olny saying that the problem arises after the service pack is installed. The result of wich Seems to be slow recovery of CPU from the idle process. This is a Guess as you are right i dont know jack for sure. My worry of attack is not over the idle process but over not Patching XP to avoid the problem as Most of the patches are security patches. On Sunday, July 20, 2003 at 12:07 pm, C K wrote: >I'm not quite sure what you are saying here so you will have to expand on it.. You >can check with the programmers from all the operating systems that use a process >similar to, or the systems idle process, and you you will get the same answers. >Service packs may cause problems in a number of areas but again, if you check with >the programmers, you will find that the code for the idle process is less likely >to blame than any other issue addressed by the services pack. I do not believe that >you are knowledgeable on the system idle process code if you think that a hacker >can use it to gain access to the machine. The system idle process is ONLY called >into play when NO work reaches the processor and there have been very few problems >actually attributed to the system idle process code itself. If you do have problems >with it, I can prove that it has nothing to do with service packs. If you are going >to have a problem with it (as I have on certian hardware which started in the beta >releases of XP), you would have had trouble with it in previous versions of NT (again >as I did) due to hardware incompatibilities or BIOS code/firmware. > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Monday, July 21, 2003 at 9:55 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) OK.. So let me clarify.. The CPU does not recover from the idle process.. The idle process is invoked and que'd when no work reaches the processor. This is the fault of the operating system or other device not working correctly to get work TO the processor which indeed can be caused by a service pack on a particular machine for many reasons. I work on, as well as, have multiple machines myself as old as 5 years and have had none of the problems that others are having with service packs, other than those which everyone is experiencing and MS is working on to correct. I have had no problems with slow machines as have some people, which only means that I don't have a problem device, driver or program loaded that could be causing a problem as could someone else. The operating system, drivers and hardware can all act as, (together, or by themselves) a bottleneck to keep work from the procesor, resulting in a machine slowing to a crawl, and that will invoke the idle process. When a machine is slow, check the CPU graph for a better representation of how much work the CPU is doing. In 99.99% of cases you will see the CPU basically doing nothing. It this case it it means that you have problems somewhere in software or hardware ranging from conflicts/bugs to a bad device, bad driver etc. The CPU activity chart and the idle process will always in my experience, (accept for a couple of hardware instances mentioned) be proportionate to the CPU activity or when compared to the combined time of all other processes. As far as service packs and vunerabilities, of course, it is happening and happening a lot, and there will always be that problem. Service packs can cause as many bugs as they are intending to fix, or at least it can seem like it. That, unfortunatly will always be a problem with code and all of the operating systems today suffer the same illness to some degree. MS just has more problems due to the massive amount of installations world wide and it's popularity as compared to other systems, and granted, there has been some sloppy programming involved for sure.. The speed of patching isn't as fast as anyone would like to see but it's not as easy to patch on todays systems as it was in systems 7 or 10 years ago. Things are much more complicted now. The more massive the code base, the harder it may be to patch something. (as I can verify from my own coding experience) On Sunday, July 20, 2003 at 5:33 pm, jeremy wrote: > >Im not saying the idle process is the cause of the problem. Im olny saying that the >problem arises after the service pack is installed. >The result of wich Seems to be slow recovery of CPU from the idle process. >This is a Guess as you are right i dont know jack for sure. >My worry of attack is not over the idle process but over not Patching XP to avoid >the problem as Most of the patches are security patches. > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Friday, February 27, 2004 at 1:32 am Posted by Khmerster (1 messages posted) although this problem is still bugging me i am glad i am not the only one with the problem. My system idle process is also bugging me. its using 99% of my CPU and because of that my computer shuts it self down when it gets too hot which is about every use of over an hour. I also think that this was the cause of my DSL Modem of some sort. this started recently when i got reconnection of my DSL. i have not yet tried to update my bios, but i will do that soon. any help please! On Monday, July 21, 2003 at 9:55 am, C K wrote: >OK.. So let me clarify.. The CPU does not recover from the idle process.. The >idle process is invoked and que'd when no work reaches the processor. This is the >fault of the operating system or other device not working correctly to get work TO >the processor which indeed can be caused by a service pack on a particular machine >for many reasons. I work on, as well as, have multiple machines myself as old as >5 years and have had none of the problems that others are having with service packs, >other than those which everyone is experiencing and MS is working on to correct. > I have had no problems with slow machines as have some people, which only means >that I don't have a problem device, driver or program loaded that could be causing >a problem as could someone else. The operating system, drivers and hardware can >all act as, (together, or by themselves) a bottleneck to keep work from the procesor, >resulting in a machine slowing to a crawl, and that will invoke the idle process. > When a machine is slow, check the CPU graph for a better representation of how much >work the CPU is doing. In 99.99% of cases you will see the CPU basically doing nothing. > It this case it it means that you have problems somewhere in software or hardware >ranging from conflicts/bugs to a bad device, bad driver etc. The CPU activity chart >and the idle process will always in my experience, (accept for a couple of hardware >instances mentioned) be proportionate to the CPU activity or when compared to the >combined time of all other processes. As far as service packs and vunerabilities, >of course, it is happening and happening a lot, and there will always be that problem. > Service packs can cause as many bugs as they are intending to fix, or at least it >can seem like it. That, unfortunatly will always be a problem with code and all >of the operating systems today suffer the same illness to some degree. MS just has >more problems due to the massive amount of installations world wide and it's popularity >as compared to other systems, and granted, there has been some sloppy programming >involved for sure.. The speed of patching isn't as fast as anyone would like to >see but it's not as easy to patch on todays systems as it was in systems 7 or 10 >years ago. Things are much more complicted now. The more massive the code base, >the harder it may be to patch something. (as I can verify from my own coding experience) > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, February 29, 2004 at 3:25 am Posted by Tony Norris (4 messages posted) OK, I am not a techy like most of you, BUT I would like to add my two pennies worth ........... I have three hard drives (family) the mobo I have and add ones, drivers seem irrelevant (?) because ...... ALL three drives have exactly the same system and SP and updates, also same drivers and add on's. BUT the slow drive (system idle process 99% cpu) has a recurring problem which the others don't have .... adware/spyware called 'ROING SEARCH ENHANCEMENT' . I delete it using a spyware prog. and there it is back again with all associated files!!! - please consider this as a possible cause and report back if you have an answer. I have not found anm answer yet, a utility would be best, but I am convinced this is MALWARE!!!! - comments? PS. Whilst on this forum three attempts have been made to plant a trojan called 'adclicker' onto my system - what is going on on the WWW these days!!!! On Monday, July 21, 2003 at 9:55 am, C K wrote: >OK.. So let me clarify.. The CPU does not recover from the idle process.. The >idle process is invoked and que'd when no work reaches the processor. This is the >fault of the operating system or other device not working correctly to get work TO >the processor which indeed can be caused by a service pack on a particular machine >for many reasons. I work on, as well as, have multiple machines myself as old as >5 years and have had none of the problems that others are having with service packs, >other than those which everyone is experiencing and MS is working on to correct. > I have had no problems with slow machines as have some people, which only means >that I don't have a problem device, driver or program loaded that could be causing >a problem as could someone else. The operating system, drivers and hardware can >all act as, (together, or by themselves) a bottleneck to keep work from the procesor, >resulting in a machine slowing to a crawl, and that will invoke the idle process. > When a machine is slow, check the CPU graph for a better representation of how much >work the CPU is doing. In 99.99% of cases you will see the CPU basically doing nothing. > It this case it it means that you have problems somewhere in software or hardware >ranging from conflicts/bugs to a bad device, bad driver etc. The CPU activity chart >and the idle process will always in my experience, (accept for a couple of hardware >instances mentioned) be proportionate to the CPU activity or when compared to the >combined time of all other processes. As far as service packs and vunerabilities, >of course, it is happening and happening a lot, and there will always be that problem. > Service packs can cause as many bugs as they are intending to fix, or at least it >can seem like it. That, unfortunatly will always be a problem with code and all >of the operating systems today suffer the same illness to some degree. MS just has >more problems due to the massive amount of installations world wide and it's popularity >as compared to other systems, and granted, there has been some sloppy programming >involved for sure.. The speed of patching isn't as fast as anyone would like to >see but it's not as easy to patch on todays systems as it was in systems 7 or 10 >years ago. Things are much more complicted now. The more massive the code base, >the harder it may be to patch something. (as I can verify from my own coding experience) > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Saturday, March 6, 2004 at 7:11 pm Posted by taker (1 messages posted) The system idle process may not be the culprit here. Twice this has happen to me. Suddenly my computer would operate super slow. The first time it affected my DSL internet connection, web pages would take forever to load even though I had high speed access. First time solution: I had a Canon faxphone that was in storage (I moved to a new address). So after I was settled in my new location with my computer in place for about a 2 months, I thought I would set up the fax. This faxphone is one of the first one's available to the public. I plugged in the phone line and the fax itself needed 120 vac recepticle. I then used an outlet in the power bar for the computer. Suddenly my internet connection became very slow. After calling the DSL tech line numourous times with no result, it clicked. I thought to myself, you know this started at the same time I hooked up the faxphone. I disconnected the power cord to the fax and my internet was at high speed again. Problem solved, it was not the system idle process! Second instance: I have a relative that moved in and now uses the computer. One time recently I was out of town for a week and when I returned my nephew informed me that there was something wrong w/ my computer that it was working really slow. After trying a few things myself, I was unable to correct the problem. I then brought it to a local repair shop. After $85.00 and a clean bill of health(computer). The shop said it was fine. It wasn't. It was the same thing as before I took it in. Most of the Windows components took about 3 minutes to load. Then once again something had been placed in proximity of the computer. That week I was away my nephew had installed a cordless phone with the base hooked in to my phone jack and the power source plugged into the power bar. I removed the cordless phone and once again the computer was back to normal. Many seem to think it is a virus(which I thought) or software, hardware or even in some replies Windows SP1. The problem may be external electical appliances which in my case was the cause. My computer has a 1.7 ghz processor and is operating normally with the system idle process at 99%. If the CPU is being used at say 5%, SIP will drop to 95%. System idle process only shows the % of the CPU "not being used" Hope this helps some of the users out there! Soldier of fortune II RULZ !!! taker On Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 9:54 am, C K wrote: >Exactly what Bob has said. If you have a slow computer something else is wrong, >either in the drivers or hardware that may be incomaptible, or problem applications >or software. If you did an u grade over an old operating system instead of a clean >install, this may be your problem. The idle process has been written about many >times before in this forum. XP isn't the only operating system that has the idle >process built in. It is there for a reason. The idle process takes place when the >processor isn't being sent any other work to do indicating that you have problems >somewhere else in your system preventing the work from getting to your processor >hence, your slow system. The idle process halts the processor saving power and reducing >heat until it gets actual work to do. Look at the performance tab in the task manager >if you want to see actual CPU usage while you are working. C K > > > [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, March 21, 2004 at 7:23 am Posted by P. Muniz (2 messages posted) Just a shot from the hip but I believe what is happening is that Windows is cataloging and or indexing the information on the hard drive. This is why it only happens once in a while. There could be other causes also. System Idle Process is displaying the % of CPU resources being used but it does not seem to display the process that is consuming the CPU resources when this happens. There are times when it will but there seems to be a hidden process that will poke it's head out from time to time and cataloging and or indexing the hard drive is what I believe is happening. I am aware that cataloging and indexing mean almost the same thing. http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum_update On Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 6:37 am, Sabrina wrote: >Does anyone know if I can disable this or why it's taking so much of my CPU? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Sunday, March 21, 2004 at 9:47 am Posted by P. Muniz (2 messages posted) One other association that just occured to me about the System Idle Process that is more connected and actually related to hard drive cataloging is that I just did a fresh install last night and noticed that while copying my music collection to the hard drive one CD at a time and converting them to MP3 in the process, my computer started to act up. The hard drive became active and the installs of music CD's became slower. This could be a clue worth looking at. Can anyone else make this connection? On Wednesday, October 2, 2002 at 6:37 am, Sabrina wrote: >Does anyone know if I can disable this or why it's taking so much of my CPU? [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Saturday, June 12, 2004 at 10:02 am Posted by DD (1 messages posted) thanks. this forum & blkviper.com helped a lot! disabled Indexing Service and my problem seems to be solved. i even gained some cpu usage when it's running correctly! p4 3.2 winXPpro soyo dragon2. thanks again! [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Saturday, June 19, 2004 at 8:54 pm Posted by Tony C. (1 messages posted) I recently reformatted and installed 98 then i upgraded to XP. I had upgraded my win98 to XP earlier and it worked fine. Now i have the System Idle Process running at 99%. My internet works fine. but whenever i run an application like 3d max, photoshop, autocad, or even Counter-strike, either they freeze while starting up, or while i am playing CS every 5 minutes my program freezes for aobut 15 seconds. I have a 933MHz P3 640 MB SDRAM GeForce4 Ti-4200 and a 250 GB HD. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: System Idle Process taking 95% of CPU Wednesday, October 27, 2004 at 5:10 pm Posted by Desire (1 messages posted) I'm having the same problem on my comp..i found out that the problem come from Window XP automatic update...turn off automatic update then access to task manager , click on processes then end process named "update.exe" then restart ur comp and all return to normal [Reply or follow-up to this message] Tip: Use one of the [Reply or follow-up to this message] links above to add a message to this thread Search this forum Start a new thread on a different subject Report abuse of the forum Return to the Windows XP Discussion Forum