Compressor only uses 30% of CPU : (

I was not able to find any previous and recent discussions about this, but my version of Compressor 4.1 only uses, at most, 30% of CPU on my Mac Pro 2013.
Any ideas as to why Compressor would use 30% only, whereas Handbrake maxes out at 100%?
Graham

Hi Graham, from your Compressor.app V4.1 "Active" pane image, these batch jobs are all queued as expected. What is not clear is if they are utilising SEGMENTING or if the TRANSCODING is taking advantage of that cool AMD FIREPRO D300 you have in that new MAC PRO!
I believe you need to review and maybe deploy some or all of these actions in compressor.app V4.1:
make sure JOB SEGMENTING is enabled for each of the batch JOBs in the BATCH WINDOW.
note that most APPLE codecs support it, others may not.
I've not used the new MACPRO 2013, it may be that if compressor.app is directing the batch jobs to the the FIREPRO D300 GPU, then SEGMENTING may not be supported at this stage - A GUESS.. anyone else know?
if JOB SEGMENTING is greyed out or unselectable (tick), then select the VIDEO tab and enable "mutipass" and see if that automatically sets on JOB SEGMENTING.. maybe not.
define a CLUSTER (single or multiple nodes) to get the transcoder to muster enough (sufficient) compressord subtasks to utilise your mac.
Rather than duplicating this infomation for the nth time, , there's loads of info on these forums and I'd direct you to the Compressor.app V4.1 Users Guide on page 101+.".. (manuals.apple.com... d/l the .PDF)
enable "ADDITIONAL INSTANCES" on this cluster to have more compressord subtasks running. this will provide concurrent (not parallel) transcoding of not only the job segments bit segments of other jobs too!
Use distributed processing - Transcode batches using other computers.. only if you have too.
just check any unneeded FRAME CONTROL setting in the Apple Default transcode settings (Inspector pane).. use the LEAST one until you are satisfied with your results.
Monitoring Tools: Try these...
Share Monitor.app ->> /Applications/Compressor.app/Contents/PlugIns/Compressor/CompressorKit.bundle/C ontents/EmbeddedApps/Share Monitor.app
drop it in the dock for easy reference
Network Encoder Monitor: +E in compressor.app
Using the SHARE MONITOR.app or the "Active" pane, for each BATCH JOB, EXPAND the disclosure triangles to review if JOB SEGMENTING is processing rather than one serialised job.
I'm curious (and quite eager) how you go with your the new macpro 2013 , compressor.app V4.1 with the AMD Firepro D300 and job segmenting.
Please post you results for others (and myself) to see!
Warwick
Hong Kong

Similar Messages

Windows XP Mode (Virtual PC) only uses half a CPU core/thread.

Not only does windows xp mode not support multiple cores, to me it looks like it only uses half a core/thread.
I noticed this because I just setup windows xp mode (virtual pc) on my computer. I updated it, joined it to our domain and then installed our legacy ERP software. This ERP software was designed and programmed to run on windows 98 or 2000, I can't
remember right now, but its hardware requirements are very low. This software runs very slows in the virtual pc, with the processor being the problem.
Matching the processor spike on the virtual pc using both performance monitor and task manager I compared it to task manager running on the host (my windows 7 machine). The spikes in cpu matched one of the threads on my i7 processor (I use threads
because an i7 has 8 threads but only 4 cores). To my surprise when the CPU reached near 100% on the virtual PC the same spike on the host was only about 50% of the cpu thread.
The host has a i7 950, 3.07GHz processor. So this means that the virtual pc can only use up to 1.5GHz. I have not run into the problem reported in other posts on this forum where the CPU is always at 50% or 100% on the virtual PC because when
their is no activity the CPU drops to 10% or less and stays there.
I will now have to use vmplayer, problem is having enough xp licenses for all users.
Was anyone else aware of this?

You can't use a half a thread. Windows VPC uses one core at 3.07GHz, there's no halving the speed of the CPU.
The only way WVPC would use a lower clock speed is if there is power management throttling the CPU speed down. Do you have a power management setting throttling your CPU? Are you sure the problem is the CPU and not disk or network related?
Task manager on the host is not a very accurate way to determine CPU usage of the VM.
If you have the correct version of Windows 7 (Pro or higher) there are no issues with XP Mode licenses, you get one license included with Windows 7. There's no restriction requiring you to use XP Mode with Windows VPC, it will work under 3rd party
virtualization solutions.

Compressor only uses 50% CPU

Whenever I use compressor it only ever uses 50% CPU across all cores. I'm using a MacPro with Dual Quad Core Xeons. There are no other apps running on the box and would like to get my compressing done faster, is there any way?

I've tried all permutations of the methods described in said topic using compressor 3 - And I can't get my 8 processors to go beyond 80% with any configuration of qmaster cluster settings, 2, 4, 8 whatever... it just doesnt work. In fact the fastest encode on the oct for me was without using clusters, just on "local machine"...
I tested a 1 min HDV QT file and ecoded it to SD WS mpeg2 using various settings - it took 23 minutes with 4 clusters (as suggested in posted discussions) - it took 21 minutes with 2 clusters - and it only took 16 minutes with no clusters - local machine and no qmaster server running. That's completely contrary to the "four virtual cluster" method - and at no time did the processors go beyond 80%
In fact, I then tested the same encode on a quad G5 and it only took 7 minutes, and all four processors were at 90% +
So what the heck is going on? How can a quad G5 beat an 8 core Intell on all counts with compressor 3?

Illustrator CS6 only using 13% of cpu

Currently using Throttlestop to overclock i7-2600 to its turbo state and setting the priority of Illustrator to realtime and the affinity to the first 4 cores. Also, the system has 16gb of RAM installed and is set up as Raid 0 on 2 250gb 7200 rpm hdd's. Even during the most stressful tasks the cpu usage never goes past 13-14%, which is half of one core. The system is completely idle except for 1% in use by various system tasks. Is there a reason as to why Illustrator is throttling itself?

Most operations in AI simply are single-threaded, partly due to its legacy, partly inherent in the underlying linear math. Unless this is massively rewritten at the core, there's no way to change any of that and even then for most people it might not at all make that much a difference and only show up with complex documents and operations...
Mylenium

After Effects CC 2014 only using 30% of CPU when rendering

I've scoured the internet for details but there's surprisingly little help when it comes to After Effects and performance.
Basically, I built a new workstation awhile ago with the hopes of really speeding up my video editing as I was starting to do a lot more. Here are the specs:
Core i7-4930k
32 GB RAM @ 1600MHz
Stock GeForce 780
Samsung 840 EVO 500GB OS drive
Crucial 240 GB SSD for Scratch Disk
3TB WD Red for Mass Storage
Windows 8.1
I must say that I've been quite disappointed so far with the setup when it comes to the CPU, especially After Effects. I would think the 6 core would greatly outperform my old 4 core, but I've found hardly any performance improvements, and in fact have seen it perform worse in a number of situations. And I think the issue is that somehow, After Effects is not fully using the CPU. Whenever rendering or previewing, all 6 physical cores as well as the 6 logical cores hover around 30% usage. Never any more. And yet, the comp it's rendering could be chugging away at maybe 2-3 frames per second, and it could clearly go faster with more CPU usage. Heat isn't throttling anything as all the cores are still at a very cool 48-50 C, and this is just pretty basic air cooling. It's definitely not being pushed that much.
I don't think it's the CPU itself as Maya gladly takes up as much CPU as possible and my render times on that have improved dramatically. After Effects however (and Premiere when not using GPU effects) can be quite slow. It's especially frustrating when other older, clearly slower computers end up rendering my comps faster.
Is there any info at all out there as to why this is? Any advice on troubleshooting? I've tried many things and can't think of anything short of maybe it being an OS issue and having to reformat (which would be quite a pain).
Any and all help would be greatly appreciated.

Martin, I don't know if there's anything Todd or I can say to change your opinions. We try to represent how After Effects works, and why the After Effects team chose to make it work that way, in a way that all users can understand so you can get back to creative work as fast as possible.
What tends to rub us the wrong way are your assertions and accusations about that. For example:
If you guys spent less time listening to the voices you want to hear, and more time on the 'yes some time difficult to hear' but nether the less valid concerns of experienced users, you would have addressed this fundermental flaw years ago.
We gave constructive feedback whilst part of that program and none of it was ever addressed. There seemed to be a weird attitude to any criticism which didn't fit the given narrative.
I'm sure you probably see it differently and it is great to hear it is being addressed.
That last statement is quite true, your perspective is your own. From our perspective, your statements do not reflect how the After Effects team interacts with After Effects users, either the users in our prerelease program or users who are not a part of that program. Fact is that we spend a lot of time talking with users: in forums, at user groups, on the phone, via email, and by visiting work sites. We take notes and discuss as a group what we learned, and use that feedback to guide the future development of After Effects. It's not all sunshine and roses, we hear plenty of negative things about After Effects. This is important as it helps us understand how to make After Effects better. At the same time, we're also cognizant that we have many different types of users with different needs and workflows, and we can't make all users happy all of the time.
What I think is not visible to you, or to most After Effects users, is how we prioritize the development of After Effects. There are many factors that go into that, starting with input from users but also including (in no particular order) fixing bugs and general improvements, industry trends, changes in hardware and software environments, maintaining a large and complex codebase (some of which is shared with other Adobe applications), maintaining interoperability with other applications (both Adobe and non-Adobe), and ultimately delivering a product that people want to use. To see how all that comes together is harder to communicate; really, you would need to sit down with us and watch us work.
The more relevant point here, Martin, is that you appear to disagree with how much priority we've given to performance improvements in After Effects. You indicate that you would prefer that we had started on this work a long time ago.
All work we do in After Effects comes at the cost of work we don't do. I'm confident that you're like me in that you have a long list of enhancements, beyond performance, that you'd like to see in After Effects. But the After Effects team is relatively small for such a complex application, and the scope of the performance-related improvements we are currently making is huge, a massive re-wiring of the application. Doing this work in a reasonable amount of time, with the number of people that we have, with as few moving parts as possible, is tricky. In that context I hope you can see that it has not been easy for us to justify putting the entire team on this effort and doing no other work, no creative features, no workflow improvements, no fixing of long-standing bugs and gotchas, etc. What is important is that this work is now in progress.
On that note, I need to temper any expectations that you may be building based on this conversation. We're laying the groundwork for the future of After Effects, and the first iteration of performance improvements that you see next year might not meet your expectations if we hype it up too much. We plan to share specific detail when we get closer to a public release, but suffice that what we are doing now is absolutely necessary for even better things to come later.
We understand your frustrations, that you'd like After Effects to be faster. We're working on it, and we appreciate your patience. We also appreciate constructive comments and questions.

Media Encoder only using 15% CPU, and system slows to cement

Not sure what's going on, but trying to export from Premiere CS6 to Media Encoder and very basic 640x360 H264 4 minute clips are taking 40 minutes, only using 15-30% CPU (on 2011 Macbook Pro 2.3 core i7), and the system slows to a cement crawl (had to stop it just to type this post). Nothing else is using any CPU and RAM is 25% free.
I don't even know where to begin to troubleshoot. Tried restarting is all so far. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Brandon

It seems there is a problem with the Mercury Playback Engine on my MBP. I turned it off and switched to software only mode, and now CPU is screaming at 750% on export and estimated time is about 8 times faster

Compressor 3.5.3 Quickcluster still only uses 20%CPU. What gives?

I'm using Final Cut Studio 7. Compressor 3.5.3. First i couldn't get clusters to work at all. So i uninstalled and reinstalled FCS7 and the Clusters seem to -set up- just fine. But when i submit a batch, Compressor STILL only uses about 20% of the CPU. What Gives? it would do that without a cluster anyway. It bugs me that Final Cut 7 only uses about 20% when rendering footage as well. I've thought about upgrading, but the reviews for fcpX and Compressor 4 have not been great.
Advice:

What codec are you using and how long it the video? Quickcluster is a waste of time if you going to ProRes. If the video duration is short Quickclusters won't kick in with all cores running.
There nothing wrong with Compressor 4... Going to compressor 4 won't solve your problem.

Adobe Media Encoder only using single core of CPU (core parking has already been disabled and did not solve the problem)

I only edit videos every few months and the last time I edited a video was around 6-9 months ago. At that time, I noticed AME was only using a single core of the CPU and contacted Adobe who instructed me to disable core parking, which worked. After disabling core parking AME used 100% of all 12 logical cores to process the video and all was good. Then last week, I decided to edit another video and noticed AME was very slow and checked and it was again only using a single core to process the video, but core parking is still turned off. By slow I mean that a 10 minute video with the lens distortion correction preset and one video transition effect is estimated to take nearly 3 hours to complete. For comparison, the GoPro software processed the same clip with the same effects in 20 minutes. Also, through troubleshooting with Adobe over the last few days, I have also tried downloading previous versions of the software but the prior versions have the same issue.
The video I'm trying to edit was shot on a GoPro Hero 4 Black with 1080p Wide at 60 frames per second. The default video format for GoPro is .mp4. The output settings I'm using when I export from Premiere Pro to AME are H.264 with the YouTube 1080p HD.
My system:
ASUSSabertooth X79
Intel core i7 4930k (6 physical cores, 12 logical cores)
16GB DDR3 Quad channel RAM
Samsung 830 SSD 128GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 (not CUDA compatible, I know)
Please ask if you need any additional information to help solve this problem.

This has been driving me CRAZY... so going over the message boards from 2 to 5 am this morning I found the best explanation I have seen. The problem is that Adobe Creative Cloud is NOT "Processor Group Aware". Windows parses any more than 36 cores into "Processor Groups" and while the Pro version of Windows 7 & 8 can handle 256 threads they have to spread them across multiple processor groups.
Simple Version: AREA | How many cores does 3ds Max support?
Microsoft's Explanation: Processor Groups (Windows)
Clearly, this is an Adobe Problem... If any engineers are reading this PLEASE review the below and incorporate it into your next build of Creative Cloud!!!
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/dn653313%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
Again, I bought a VERY expensive machine based on your white paper that recommended Dual Xeon Workstations. Please, Please Give us the product you PROMISED!!!
Michael

Premiere Pro CC only using 30% CPU and none of the GPU

Hi,
I’m very new to video editing (actually I have no Idea what H264, or avi or mp4 or mov is, I just need the video to work) and I have never used Premiere Pro before. Now I'm trying the CC 7.0 trial.
My goal is to achieve the fastest rendering times possible.
Today I have upgraded my PC for maximal performance in video editing:
Intel i7 4930K (12threads)
Radeon 6950 (2GB)
16GB RAM
SSD
I have a recorded video of me playing a PC game in .avi 2552*1348 resolution (2560*1440 monitor without some borders).
I have set export to H.264 and settings to match source (resolution 2552*1348, 30 FPS, Progressive, Square pixels, NTSC, main, 5.0).
But when rendering (no effects, just cutting) the program only uses 22-45% of the entire CPU and none of the GPU.
The best result with this stress was cca 1:1 rendering:movie length. I'm using 16GB RAM, I tried 32GB and 64GB and the stress on CPU and GPU was the same and the rendering times changed only slightly.
I have an SSD and the read write speeds during rendering are 1-9 MB/s so there is plenty of performance left.
Frankly, this 1:1 performance offers Power Director 11 which I have been using so far. (When editing 1080p the ratio in PP is cca 1:2,5, the same as in Power Director.)
So when the disks are idle, the GPU is idle, more RAM changes nothing and the CPU only works on 1/3 its capacity, what is the bottleneck?
I want to use 100% of the CPU and 100% of the GPU and have the rendering:movie say 0,3:1 or so.
What can I change to fully use the processing power of my computer?
Thanks

Start reading here: Tweakers Page

IMovie only using 50% CPU power

Hi,
When I export my project in iMovie my CPU usage holds at 50%. I accept this does mean I can do other things but would like the export to go faster.
Is this usual for iMovie to only use 50% CPU (and only about 1gb of RAM (of 8gb)) or do I need to do something?
New to Macs so any help appreciated.
dcbevan

Hi
As I get it - Doesn't iMovie take full use of multiple core processors. Not even Pro
applications does this to 100%
BUT
RAM - iMovie or FinalCut are not that RAM hungry - 1 to 2 GB would be OK
Free Space on Start-up hard disk - VERY IMPORTANT
• 25Gb my minimum for iDVD
• 10Gb my minimum for iMovie
• 5Gb and iMovie runs slow and instable
• <1Gb and iMovie might not run OK at all
Other applications running in paralell - results in bad performances
• Energy Saver
• Do not spinn down hard disks
• Use of USB/USB2 external hard disks = Slow and bad performances especially when getting full
FireWire or internal e-Sata performs best.
• Screen savers - may be (by directing it to an empty folder - I got the feeling of slight increase
in performances)
My list on howto speed up iDVD Slightly - might also applie on iMovie.
*Speed up iDVD*
To speed up iDVD
TO GET IT TO WORK SLIGHTLY FASTER
• Minimum of 25Gb free space on Start-Up hard disk - if less than 5Gb slow and unstable - less than 1Gb might even not start.
• Choise of encoding method will give very different productions speeds. On my d-G5 2GHz
*Professional Quality (movies + menus up to 120 min.)* - BEST
Takes about 2 x times the other ones - but if quality is of essence
(Quality might be as good as or even better for movies under 60 minutes - by using Best Performances BUT not for movies up to 120 minutes)
2 hour movie + menu = about 4 hours to encode at it’s best on my system
*Best Performances (movies + menus less than 60 min.)* - High quality on final DVD
1 hour including menu = about 1 hour to encode
*High Quality* (in iDVD08 or 09) / Best Quality (in iDVD6) *(movies + menus up to 120 min.)* - slightly lower quality than above
2 hours including menu = about 2 hour to encode
• Use an as simple DVD-menu possibly without any animation at all. This reduces processing speed dramatically. I use ”Old Theme - and Brushed Metal” and animation turned off.
• An as fast Mac and as many cores/CPUs possibly. My PowerMac G5 has two CPUs and iDVD uses about 120% = use more than only one CPU/Core. How many it can address I don’t know (anyone ? )
• If possibly - Use two internally e-Sata drives - Drive access takes a great deal of time
else FW-800 or FW-400 or USB2 or network storage (slowest and near to useless)
to work on one (internal, boot, Mac OS, Start-up hard disk - will be BAD - and slow
Normally my d-G5 2GHz takes about 2 x movie material when iDVD and Mac OS on one internal HD and material is on the other internal one.
Now with material on an external USB2-drive and an external Lacie FW-400 as Start-up drive material of about 1.5h will need about 4-6 hours to get encoded and burned to DVD.
Choise and use of hard disks is essential.
• I guess that a Solid State Disks might improve speed
• No other programs running in BackGround eg EnergySaver, Internet, AirPort, Bluetooth etc.
• Don’t let HD spinn down or be turned off (in EnergySave)
• Move hard disks that are not to be used to Trash - To be disconnected/turned off
• Goto Spotlight and set the rest of them under Integrity (not to be scanned)
• Set screensaver to a folder without any photo - then make an active corner (up right for me) and set
pointer to this - turns on screen saver - to show that it has nothing to show
• If Mac with only place for one internal hard disk. Then I would try to use an external FW (Mac OS Extended) one as Start-Up hard disk and store material on the internal one.
eg iMac or ProBook or alike.
from Karsten -
• I assume that resolution and codec of source is another factor ... scaling (e.g. 1280x720 to 720x576 = that is an 'un-even' calculation). or, a difference in speed reg. to h264, dv-stream or aic as input ....
Yours Bengt W

Power Saver Problems M30-344 (CPU only uses 600MHz)

Hi!
In my m30-344 are changed mainboard and display.
At this time i can't use the full 1.5ghz of the cpu!
In the Power Saver Profile i can choose only the cpu-rate 1-3! I have now de-installed this tool and reinstalled the version by the net. But i can only use 600mhz!
What can i do?
[Edited by: admin on 07-May-05 08:18]

Hi
Just need a little more help on this! I rang up pc world today and they had no idea what i was on about with the micro code. The guy kept saying its because i have no prossessor intensive apps running so it would run at 600mhz, he also said that cpuz is probably reporting the wrong cpu speed.
I know this cannot be the case as in the bios it is set to high which will mean it will run at 1600mhz all the time and not drop to 600mhz. I also ran a game in the background, while raring a 600mb file with 6 ie windows open to no avail just to proove to him that it wasnt goin to 1600! :-)
But he still didnt understand! So i need some light shed on what this micro code buisiness is all about because i have to explain to them exactly what the problem is. I need some info on this by tuesday so i can send it off with the laptop! Any help kindly recieved!
Regards
maki43

AE only using 25 percent of my CPU

I would like to get faster renders. I have noticed that after effects is only using 25 percent of my cpu. Is there any way to crank that all the way up to 100 percent like Premier does automatically?

CARLOSA345 wrote:
First of all do you work for Adobe?
I do not work for Adobe. I'm a user like you. People on forums helped me out a lot when I was first learning AE over a decade ago and I like giving back to the communities that helped me so much.
CARLOSA345 wrote:
All 3d applications which are doing more intense calculations than AE dont require fine tuning to work properly.
This is a very valid frustration. It certainly seems as if it should behave differently.
However, your statement also demonstrates the core of the reason for the RAM/CPU behavior you've described. 3d software is doing more intense calculations. That's why it maxes the processors out, but look at the RAM use. For many of the 3d renders I do, the RAM isn't even halfway used yet all the cores are cranking away on my computer (plus all the cores on all the other computers I've wrangled into the render farm). After Effects is doing a lot of things that 3d software doesn't do, and so it uses system resources differently. It needs more RAM (for some compositions) and thus you're waiting on RAM while the processors seem to sit idle.
I've seen some folks with very footage-heavy compositions where their RAM and processors are sitting pretty idle because the bottleneck is their hard drive. If you're pulling 45 1080P clips at once for a shot, it's gonna take a bit for a normal hard drive to serve that up (luckily for me at my full-time job, I don't use normal hard drives).
But this is the crux of the problem. AE is such a versatile toolbox. It does things like DOF, 3d lights, soft shadows, particles, etc. but it also does keying, rotoscoping, stabilization and many other tasks. Some may rely on system resources other than the processors. That's why Adobe has made AE as tweakable as it is - they serve such a wide variety of uses.
Although, speaking of tweaking, have you seen how much tweaking you can do on C4D? It has a LOT more things in it to tweak than AE does. It doesn't usually crash though, but then, neither does my AE (which is why I suggested we could help figure out your issues).
And speaking of things sitting there idle, I would love for C4D to implement some form of GPU rendering natively as an option. I have very powerful GPUs in my computers at work (because my boss didn't listen to my technical request) and so it just sits there while C4D pounds on the processors. We haven't had time to do research into all the various GPU rendering plugins for C4D in order to make a choice and it frustrates the heck out of me to have all that horsepower just sitting there, idle.
CARLOSA345 wrote:
Also you tell me that the team is working on the problem so what good would it do to start a thread on it you can find threads on this subject by the bunches and its never really resolved.
The reason I suggested starting a thread was that I hoped the folks here in the forum could help you get your systems running without crashing on you. While I may have over a decade of experience, if you put the experience of the other folks on the forum together we have many centuries of experience. The veterans on these forums don't have the crashing issues you seem to be describing. Thus, I thought we might be able to help resolve your problems and remove the frustration you're experiencing.
Other threads from other people are running different systems than you are. Different OS, different hardware, different third-party plugins... If the majority of AE users had the crashing problems you're describing, AE wouldn't be the powerhouse in the industry that it is. That is what sparked my hope that there may be something fixable for you. RAM filling up while the processors sit at 25% might not be fixable by troubleshooting, but crashing probably can be.
And yes, the AE team says they're working on making it better, but it takes a while to rewrite software that is as complicated as AE is. This is not the kind of change that comes in a month or two. So, in the meantime, I thought we could help you work within the parameters of your current toolset until it improves.
I'm sure you've already been through these resources, but if you don't want to get help from the folks on the forums, it wouldn't hurt to take another look:
Optimizing for performance: Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects
Video2Brain - Optimizing CPUs
FAQ: What are optimum memory settings for best performance in After Effects?
A recorded event where the Premiere and AE team discussed how their programs use system resources: http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/event/index.cfm?event=set_registered&id=2490687&loc=en_us
Like I said, I'm just a user like you and I'm only on these forums to try to help everyone else learn enjoy using AE as much as I do. Hopefully some of this helps you too.

Why only using one CPU

Just noticed when importing CD into iTunes on my MacBook is only uses one cpu, with activity monitor it show 98-100% CPU and never goes over 100%
My fans also run when importing, I use lossless.
Why not use more CPU speed?
R

I believe only applications writen to do so will take advantage of dual processors. I guess iTunes has not yet been updated for dual processor use.
Patrick

ESXI Guest VM is using 100% Guest CPU, but only 7% Host CPU

You're running a very old version of 5.5 so one of the first things I'd do is to install the latest patches.

We have a Dell T420 server running ESXi 5.5. The host has a single E5-2407 CPU (4 Core 2.2 GHz no Hyperthreading), 16 GB of RAM, and local RAID storage. The host runs a single Windows Server 2008 VM, which was a P2V conversion. The VM is currently assigned 1 Socket and 4 Cores, matching the host CPU. Since setting up this server about a year ago, it has had a recurring problem pop up every few months. When the problem happens, the Server 2008 VM suddenly has max CPU usage and terrible performance, but CPU is being maxed not by a single program, but from several normal processes. For example, WMI, explorer.exe, and task manager may all show 30% CPU usage. Meanwhile, though the Guest VM has 100% CPU usage, the Host will show it only using 300-500 MHz of CPU, or about 7% of available. This is despite the fact it's the sole VM and has full...
This topic first appeared in the Spiceworks Community

Multisim 11 only uses one CPU core during simulation

Hi,
Just recently I've been using MultiSim again, v11 if that matters, and simulating goes slow, to my opinion that is.
Now there are two things that I've noticed:
- Multisim only uses one of two CPU cores during simulation, not both;
- I've enabled CPU throttle (AMD's Cool'n'Quiet) but corespeed remains very low even though Multisim needs CPU power while simulating.
The simulating of a NE555-based LED-flash circuit requires about 28 seconds to get to 100ms in the simulation. Now if I can get the CPU to throttle up, by for example having Prime95 stress one of the two cores, then the simulation only requires 12 seconds to get to 100ms.
So here are my two questions:
1. Is Multisim 11 capable of using more than one CPU core while simulating? If yes, how can I get it to use more than one?
2. Probably not the right forum to ask, but is there a way to force Windows 7 Ultimate x64 to throttle up the CPU when Multisim starts simulating? Since Multisim does not seem to stress the only core it uses enough to throttle it up. Using Prime95 on one core does trigger a throttle up.
With regards,
Bart Grefte
Relevant specs:
Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Multisim v11
AMD A4-3400
16GB RAM

Completely forgot this topic....
Is there a good reason why there is no multicore support? Multisim can certainly use it for simulating.
As for the CPU throttling, I found a batch that can increase/decrease the "minimum processor state"-setting and it works immediately, no reboot required.
@echo off
powercfg.exe -getactivescheme > "%userprofile%\appdata\~apo.tmp"
set /p v_currentscheme= <"%userprofile%\appdata\~apo.tmp"
set v_currentscheme=%v_currentscheme:~24,36%
del "%userprofile%\appdata\~apo.tmp"
powercfg -setacvalueindex %v_currentscheme% 54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00 893dee8e-2bef-41e0-89c6-b55d0929964c %1
powercfg -setdcvalueindex %v_currentscheme% 54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00 893dee8e-2bef-41e0-89c6-b55d0929964c %1
powercfg -s %v_currentscheme%
exit
Usage is simple:
Start -> run -> c:\pathtobatch.bat 100
for "minimum processor state"-setting at 100%
Start -> run -> c:\pathtobatch.bat 5
for "minimum processor state"-setting at 5%
Please note that "set v_currentscheme=%v_currentscheme:~24,36%" is not the same for every language. The original batch had "set v_currentscheme=%v_currentscheme:~19,36%" (most likely for the English version of Windows 7), but since my Windows install is in Dutch, I had to change it in order for it to work.
Running the batch with @echo off removed will show why.

Compressor only uses 30% of CPU : (

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for