What's the bottleneck when CPU and disks are not strained?

Discussion in 'PC Hardware' started by John Doe, Oct 25, 2011.

  1. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    Sometimes I wonder, when none of my four CPU cores are over 50%, and
    disk activity is minimal, why would a process seem slow? The system
    bus?

    Mainly curious. Thanks.
     
    John Doe, Oct 25, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    If the slowness might have to do with system memory (RAM), is
    there some Performance Monitor counter for that? I should be able
    to see something that is maxed out. Having a Performance Monitor
    counter showing that bottleneck would be a big deal here.

    Thanks.
     
    John Doe, Oct 25, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. John Doe

    Bug Dout Guest

    John Doe <> writes:

    > Sometimes I wonder, when none of my four CPU cores are over 50%, and
    > disk activity is minimal, why would a process seem slow? The system
    > bus?
    >
    > Mainly curious. Thanks.


    Well, define slow. Interactive use? Another program? And compared to
    what, that is, when does the system not seem slow?
    --
    Nature fits all her children with something to do, He who would write
    and can't write, can surely review.
    - James Russell Lowell
     
    Bug Dout, Oct 25, 2011
    #3
  4. John Doe

    Davej Guest

    On Oct 24, 9:07 pm, John Doe <> wrote:
    > Sometimes I wonder, when none of my four CPU cores are over 50%, and
    > disk activity is minimal, why would a process seem slow? The system
    > bus?
    >
    > Mainly curious. Thanks.


    Probably busy waiting for orders from the botnet?
     
    Davej, Oct 25, 2011
    #4
  5. John Doe

    Mark F Guest

    On 25 Oct 2011 03:07:46 GMT, John Doe <> wrote:

    > Sometimes I wonder, when none of my four CPU cores are over 50%, and
    > disk activity is minimal, why would a process seem slow? The system
    > bus?

    1. processes than can't multithread and multithreaded stuff
    that is waiting for other threads

    Even things that can multithread in general can get slowed down.
    Things that are piped (like Unix pipes or the stuff I do
    that has virtual encrypted disks) can have lots of processes
    stalled waiting for the previous stage to send it the next
    buffer's worth of stuff.)

    2. things doing random access or un-buffered disk activity.
    The disks might not look busy but data transfer rate goes
    down a great deal. The I/O count on the disks might not
    look all that high, but until you look carefully you might
    not see that the disk is waiting for seeks/rotation.

    3. Perhaps some software resource is tied up.

    4. Or, as you say, it could be a bus.

    Sometimes data is moved around more times than you
    might have thought. Be sure to count everything,
    including graphics.

    I haven't played around with this stuff for more than 20 years,
    but when it then DMA was usually involved.

    When you add in the graphics stuff and the fact that data movements
    by DMA might use 2 to 4 times the bandwidth you though you were
    using, perhaps a bus is the bottleneck.

    5. Maybe the protocol overhead on USB or something is using more
    bandwidth than you think. (For example, a not too busy disk
    on USB might be a bottleneck.)

    6. I also found on some systems that everything had to wait for
    certain types of floppy disk access; perhaps there is some
    modern example of this. (I never found out if the floppy issue
    was due to poor software design or some hardware limitation.
    >
    > Mainly curious. Thanks.
     
    Mark F, Oct 25, 2011
    #5
  6. John Doe

    Paul Guest

    John Doe wrote:
    > Sometimes I wonder, when none of my four CPU cores are over 50%, and
    > disk activity is minimal, why would a process seem slow? The system
    > bus?
    >
    > Mainly curious. Thanks.


    I've seen cases I can't explain.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Oct 26, 2011
    #6
  7. John Doe

    Flasherly Guest

    On Oct 24, 11:07 pm, John Doe <> wrote:
    > Sometimes I wonder, when none of my four CPU cores are over 50%, and
    > disk activity is minimal, why would a process seem slow? The system
    > bus?
    >
    > Mainly curious. Thanks.


    Coding efficiency, too. Some assembly compiled routines were
    preferable (adaptable for spawning into a command interpreter process
    or batched) over higher-language levels of abstractions - NET
    frameworks, DLLs, or whatever else makes for accompanying arrays
    graphical poison as preferably pretty to actually getting on the stick
    for a rushjob. I've heard mention these new AMD processors are geared
    for more efficient core interaction in terms of shared core
    arbitration when dealing with programs not specifically written for a
    multi-core platform;- but since they're already out and being sold,
    I've as well heard a few sceptical reactions to implementing the
    concept. Actually, past an unpopular conundrum for code-level
    incompatibility with abandoned software, doesn't seem as there's much
    choice in pragmatic terms, unless the rules of the universe were bent
    past multicores contained in speeds at something higher than present
    3-4Ghz processors. I mean, how many times does it take to get tired
    of hearing the same 4-year-old proposal, that a multicore without
    specific software lacks overall great advantage while only running
    single processes over a single core without concurrence.
     
    Flasherly, Oct 26, 2011
    #7
  8. John Doe

    Mark Guest

    On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 19:15:45 -0400, Paul <> wrote:

    >John Doe wrote:
    >> Sometimes I wonder, when none of my four CPU cores are over 50%, and
    >> disk activity is minimal, why would a process seem slow? The system
    >> bus?
    >>
    >> Mainly curious. Thanks.

    >
    >I've seen cases I can't explain.


    It's called Windows ;-)
    --
    (\__/) M.
    (='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
    (")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
    posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
    everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
     
    Mark, Nov 11, 2011
    #8
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. m0rk

    MapInfo and hard drive speed bottleneck

    m0rk, Nov 22, 2005, in forum: DIY Computers
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    805
    Andrew Chapman
    Nov 23, 2005
  2. David A.Lethe
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    288
    David A.Lethe
    Sep 27, 2005
  3. sl5400
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    304
  4. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    233
    John Doe
    Nov 13, 2011
  5. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    186
    John Doe
    Nov 21, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page