PabUK Veteran Posted September 15, 2001 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2001 So what could be causing the rest of us to have such high CPU usage when XP is idle? I am talking about when there are no programs running, right after booting up even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp0radic Posted September 15, 2001 Share Posted September 15, 2001 I haven't tried XP yet, so my fav. is Win 2K Pro. I got SP2, and it plays all the latest games. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elin27 Posted September 15, 2001 Share Posted September 15, 2001 Exactly..XP Rulez! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElGato Posted September 15, 2001 Share Posted September 15, 2001 Originally posted by PabUK What processor have you got ElGato? Just a lowly PIII800, at the moment. Got NewsPro + 4 x Agents and Outlook running right now and the Task Manager reports 15 - 20% CPU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aco Veteran Posted September 15, 2001 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2001 Originally posted by PabUK So what could be causing the rest of us to have such high CPU usage when XP is idle? I am talking about when there are no programs running, right after booting up even. Have a look in the Task Manager (Ctrl+Shift+Esc) as I am sure you did, then look at what processes are using the CPU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger H. Veteran Posted September 15, 2001 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2001 Windows XP forever! No better OS there in my opinion. If my computer looked this good all along i wouldn't need a girl. :D Oh well... girls do have their uses sometimes.. Right baby?... baby? where she go, DAMN COMPUTER!! No she saw that and left me. Well Jenna J here I come! (hehe) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam2001 Posted September 15, 2001 Share Posted September 15, 2001 Win XP rules My processor usage is about 1-3% when idle. Do you think you may have installed something like IIS or someat, which i assume would always be operating in the background (never used it so not certain). Processor = Athlon 1Ghz XP boots up almost faster than Win Me, looks stunning, easy to use, and best of all compatibility is not a problem - hardly - anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PabUK Veteran Posted September 15, 2001 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2001 To answer your question aco, the only process that really uses much CPU (often around 9%) is the one labelled 'SYSTEM' which is obviously something to do with the OS itself. Check your task manager and see if 'SYSTEM' uses any on yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kintamanate Posted September 15, 2001 Share Posted September 15, 2001 Wow all this talk of XP makes me want to get it. hehe oh well right now im just stuck with WinME/Win2k partition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khujo Posted September 15, 2001 Share Posted September 15, 2001 the system svchost and services process will always be running you can make the services.exe use less ram by turning off some of the services, http://www.3dspotlight.com/tweaks/win2k_se...ces/index.shtml will help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjmUK Posted September 15, 2001 Author Share Posted September 15, 2001 1280x960..? Mine's 1280x1024 (now i'm confused), unless you're using a smaller monitor than mine, I use a 17", I guess you're using 14"-15". Oh well, back to the o/s... I've used them all, I also used a Win98SE/WinMe/Win2K tri boot partition, and so I tried WinXP on my 2nd HD and love it, so I've merged all the partitions into one. I would NEVER go back to the other o/s's, it's like going from a Windows shell back to a DOS shell - I just wouldn't do it :ninja: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PabUK Veteran Posted September 15, 2001 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2001 I use a 17" monitor too, but I prefer 1280x960 to 1280x1024 because it has the same aspect ratio as the other resolutions (640x480, 800x600 and 1024x768). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aco Veteran Posted September 15, 2001 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2001 Originally posted by PabUK I use a 17" monitor too, but I prefer 1280x960 to 1280x1024 because it has the same aspect ratio as the other resolutions (640x480, 800x600 and 1024x768). Exactly! Like I said earlier in this thread, why are the ratios different for these? *1152x864 is good * w00t! Woohoo PabUK is back, now I have someone to post with :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PabUK Veteran Posted September 15, 2001 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2001 I don't know why they are different, maybe someone with more knowledge on the subject could answer that. As for me being back, I am glad I can bring happiness just by being here! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted September 15, 2001 Share Posted September 15, 2001 Speaking of taking up resources: Explorer takes up 24 MB of memory on my system, and "System Idle Process" takes up 92 (does not represent percentage of CPU process) under the CPU section of the Process tab in the Windows Task Manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjmUK Posted September 15, 2001 Author Share Posted September 15, 2001 Originally posted by PabUK I use a 17" monitor too, but I prefer 1280x960 to 1280x1024 because it has the same aspect ratio as the other resolutions (640x480, 800x600 and 1024x768). Curious...How does one change the resolution from 1280x1024 to 1280x960..? I only have the following options: - 800x600 - 1024x768 - 1152x864 - 1280x1024 Is it something to do with the software PowerStrip..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PabUK Veteran Posted September 15, 2001 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2001 No, they are both an option for me from the normal display settings. Video modes are dependant on graphics card and monitor (and suitable drivers for both) though so your combo probably just doesn't allow that resolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjmUK Posted September 15, 2001 Author Share Posted September 15, 2001 ah right - I follow, thanks :ninja: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostly Harmless Posted September 16, 2001 Share Posted September 16, 2001 1280x960 keeps the aspect ratio. I'll have to go one better however, and mention that I'm using it on a 19" monitor ;-) As for changing, it depends on the INF file for your monitor. I find the plug and play monitor detects fine with most hardware, otherwise hunt down the manufacturers INF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willywonka69 Posted September 16, 2001 Share Posted September 16, 2001 i still like me 1280x1024 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MulletRobZ Posted September 16, 2001 Share Posted September 16, 2001 Linux-Mandrake 8.0 kicks ass! However, I didn't test Windows XP yet, but once I get high-speed Internet, I'm going to download it and test it for myself! If you want my opinion on the best Windows, I'd say Windows 98 SE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quboid Posted September 18, 2001 Share Posted September 18, 2001 Uhh, Linux? Why did you limit Linux to RH and Mandrake? What about Corel, Debian etc users? Seems kinda strange to limit Linux and not give a hold all category for other Linux users :s I guess I'll go for RH/Mandrake Linux and pretend it's for all Linuxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts