Why does mount and blade use 100% of my cpu?

Users who are viewing this thread

Hey,

The question is in the subject. My system's specs are :

Pentium 4 2.6 ghz Cpu
Radeon 9250 (Yeah, I got rid of the Radeon x1300 and reinstalled my 9250)
1 GB of RAM DDR

Any ideas?
 
Knightofhonour25 said:
Hey,

The question is in the subject. My system's specs are :

Pentium 4 2.6 ghz Cpu
Radeon 9250 (Yeah, I got rid of the Radeon x1300 and reinstalled my 9250)
1 GB of RAM DDR

Any ideas?

And using 100% CPU time is bad because...?
I mean isn't it good if the game uses all CPU time, which is free? And if you are running some background programs, it's not possible that M&B takes control of the whole CPU. M&B has probably the highest priority while it runs as an active program, but it still give some CPU time to other programs.

If your background programs won't crash/stop responding everything works like it should.

Added:
Yeah and if you run some important program while playing M&B and want to give more CPU time to it, you can do it in the task manager (windows 2000/xp). Just lower M&B priority and raise the other. This may cause slower gameplay, but life is full of choices :smile:
 
Because using all the cpu means that my GPU is not handling all of the graphics. Not to mention the fact that if I run mount and blade for 20 minutes with it using 100% of my CPU my Cpu heats up to about 120 degress
 
Every game will use 100% of your CPU.
If it's 120 fahrenheit it's ok.
And I assume it's 120 fahrenheit, because no CPU I know can run at 120 celsius..
 
LOL, yeah Dorian it's fahrenheit. 120 celsius is above the boiling point (I think) which means...my computer would have been a bomb instead of a desktop.
 
Strange, many other games of mine do not use 100% (Not even Doom 3!)


PS, If the temperature it was Kelvin we'd all be very jealous of your über cooling system :razz:


 
lol, I have to buy a cooling system anyway. Some of my other games (Company of Heroes, Brothers in Arms, ex. The cpu heats up to about 160 degrees F)
 
M&B doesn't, it's microsoft's crappy coding to blame. Or do you really think that "system idle process" uses 100% of the system resources when nothings happening? :lol:

IIRC Windows reports CPU useage on a priority based system rather than actual useage of the processor - i.e. the app (or game) in the foreground will usually report around 100% because Windows has allocated as many resources as possible to the task. The game could be sitting there doing nothing, but the useage reported will be the same because those resources are still allocated, whether used or not (in CPU terms, Windows is reporting how many cycles the game could use if it wants, rather than how many cycles the processor is actually doing something).

You can get programs which will tell you the actual CPU useage of an app based on the instructions being processed, though to be honest it's not worth it. They'll cause a slowdown on the machine and won't provide you with useful information, unless you've a burning desire to know precisely what your processor is doing each cycle.
 
Seems to me from a cursory google search that a lot of other operating systems do the same thing (run a process at the very lowest priority that does nothing). 

Is there something particularly kludgy about the way Microsoft went about it?
 
Actually, most don't (unless you count processes which are designed to monitor the CPU useage :wink:)

Microsoft's implementation is somewhat erroneous - basically, it'll show as being in use for any process which doesn't have an entry in task manager. In other words, System Idle Process will report itself as being the main running task whenever a system task you're not normally able to view is running, leading to much confusion and pointlessness. It's more a problem with how taskmanager works as a whole though.
 
Back
Top Bottom