Skip to main content
Topic: cpu consume (Read 950 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

cpu consume

Do it is normal that fb2k without plugin consume 2.4-3% cpu while xmplay only 0.24-0.41 ?

Re: cpu consume

Reply #1
No, it is not. What audio format are you playing and are you sure no DSPs or other heavy components are involved? Also how do you verify the CPU usage?

For reference playing AAC in an emulated Pentium II machine (super slow setup) task manager shows CPU usage for foobar2000 to be 0%.

Re: cpu consume

Reply #2
Use mp3 in streaming and in local.
removed any addon in "user-components" and any in "components" at exception foo_input_std.dll and foo_ui_std.dll.
I use Process Explorer or ProcessHacker with same values.
Windows Task Manager instead in same condition report 0-04% for fb2k.
Do it fail Windows Task Manager?
Do you measured with Windows Task Manager?
Do you can to try with other task manager?
What is the effective cpu consume of fb2k?

Re: cpu consume

Reply #3
You can still have visualisations enabled that can require a lot of processing power depending on their size.

Windows Task Manager can show misleading results. And at least in older Windows it certainly does.

Process Explorer uses smarter means to show CPU usage and it appears quite reliable.

You could check effective CPU usage when decoding local MP3 files by installing Decoding Speed Test component. This excludes all visualization processing and output code from the results. Run the decoding speed test on your file(s) and you'll see speed expressed as "X times realtime". You can calculate how much average processing power with realtime playback that would be by dividing 100% with the X. For example 50x realtime would be 2% CPU usage, 200x realtime speed would be 0.5% CPU usage.

On my machine Process Explorer shows 0.11 - 0.12% CPU usage for XMPlay playing a test MP3 file. Playing the same file in foobar2000 v1.4.5 with the spectrum visualizer visible uses 0.20 - 1.40% CPU, depending on how wide the visualizer is. With the visualizer turned off foobar2000 uses 0.12 - 0.13% CPU. Decoding speed test for the file shows 833.728x realtime speed which translates to 0.12% average CPU usage.

Re: cpu consume

Reply #4
You can still have visualisations enabled that can require a lot of processing power depending on their size.
I noticed that they visualisations enabled CPU even when they are not active and visible.
Disabled also this i see that cpu consume remain double that xmplay.
Decoding Speed Test: 621.168x realtime

Re: cpu consume

Reply #5
So pure decoding uses 0.16% CPU time. The output component requires a bit more processing on top of that but that should be a minimal increase.

You could try a clean portable install on the side to see if the behavior is visible there.

Another thing that came to mind is related to modern CPU power saving features. If CPU utilization is low enough CPU can idle at very low operating frequency which makes even low CPU usage appear relatively high. You could circumvent that by temporarily switching your power plan to "High performance". Or you could use CPU-Z to see if the CPU runs at the same frequency when you use XMPlay as when you use foobar2000.

 

Re: cpu consume

Reply #6
In the last foobar2000 v1.5 beta 9 i see it now consume more that 7% of cpu.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019