|
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
Does anyone know of a _simple_ process monitor, ideally with an
adjustable threshold, that will show when anything (other than "System Idle Process") is using more than x% of CPU, _and show what it is_ (ideally with slight delay/prolongation)? I have (SysInternals) Process Explorer, but that - and even just Task Manager - are somewhat tedious to use in this way - especially for relatively (second or two) short-term peaks. [Shorter than that wouldn't bother me.] Ideally, I'm thinking of something with a _small_ window, that normally shows nothing (or some "all is well" indication), but shows the _name_ of the process when something goes above - I don't know, hence me wanting it to be adjustable, but say 10%? - CPU for more than a second or two. So when I'm doing relatively little, and the fan suddenly ramps up and then down again, I'm not left wondering "what caused that?" (I've thought of just using Task Manager [in CPU-sorted mode], and shrinking its window vertically, but that wouldn't really be satisfactory - not least because [AFAIK] you can't have it _not_ display System Idle Process, which would usually be at the top of the list.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "If even one person" arguments allow the perfect to become the enemy of the good, and thus they tend to cause more harm than good. - Jimmy Akins quoted by Scott Adams, 2015-5-5 |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote
| So when I'm doing relatively little, and the fan suddenly ramps up and | then down again, I'm not left wondering "what caused that?" | Who ya gonna call? Ghost Busters! I don't have a suggestion, but I would note that it's not always something racing that ramps up my fan. We're having a heat wave lately. Sometimes it seems to speed up just to catch up. Or I might just start a program and that's enough to trigger it. If it were me I'd check task scheduler and services to make sure nothing unnecessary is set to run. Also check Autoruns. For instance, if you use Everything.exe then do you really need indexing enabled? I use Agent Ransack and haven't enabled indexing for many years. Since everything.exe has its own indexing, that seems like all the more reason to turn off the indexing service. In general, unless you have a lot of self-updating going on, there's rarely any reason for things to start of their own accord. I don't think I have anything at all on XP or 7 that runs without me starting it. (I guess AV scans would do that, but I also don't have AV installed.) On XP I've even disabled Task Scheduler, though 7 doesn't seem to allow me to do that. I have to do wacky things like schedule an unwanted task for 3 AM when I won't have the computer on. |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
Does anyone know of a _simple_ process monitor, ideally with an adjustable threshold, that will show when anything (other than "System Idle Process") is using more than x% of CPU, _and show what it is_ (ideally with slight delay/prolongation)? I have (SysInternals) Process Explorer, but that - and even just Task Manager - are somewhat tedious to use in this way - especially for relatively (second or two) short-term peaks. [Shorter than that wouldn't bother me.] Ideally, I'm thinking of something with a _small_ window, that normally shows nothing (or some "all is well" indication), but shows the _name_ of the process when something goes above - I don't know, hence me wanting it to be adjustable, but say 10%? - CPU for more than a second or two. So when I'm doing relatively little, and the fan suddenly ramps up and then down again, I'm not left wondering "what caused that?" (I've thought of just using Task Manager [in CPU-sorted mode], and shrinking its window vertically, but that wouldn't really be satisfactory - not least because [AFAIK] you can't have it _not_ display System Idle Process, which would usually be at the top of the list.) If you untick "Show processes from all users" you lose SIP. Ed |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in
: Does anyone know of a _simple_ process monitor, ideally with an adjustable threshold, that will show when anything (other than "System Idle Process") is using more than x% of CPU, _and show what it is_ (ideally with slight delay/prolongation)? I have (SysInternals) Process Explorer, but that - and even just Task Manager - are somewhat tedious to use in this way - especially for relatively (second or two) short-term peaks. [Shorter than that wouldn't bother me.] Ideally, I'm thinking of something with a _small_ window, that normally shows nothing (or some "all is well" indication), but shows the _name_ of the process when something goes above - I don't know, hence me wanting it to be adjustable, but say 10%? - CPU for more than a second or two. So when I'm doing relatively little, and the fan suddenly ramps up and then down again, I'm not left wondering "what caused that?" (I've thought of just using Task Manager [in CPU-sorted mode], and shrinking its window vertically, but that wouldn't really be satisfactory - not least because [AFAIK] you can't have it _not_ display System Idle Process, which would usually be at the top of the list.) Have you tried the built-in Resource Monitor (resmon.exe)? It doesn't meet your requirement to trigger at a particular level, but I've found it useful for identifying high CPU and high disk usage processes. Performance Monitor (perfmon.exe) can also be useful, if you add the "Process" counter and set the view to "Report", but it's not as simple to set up and use. https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/...2/02/01/using- resource-monitor-to-troubleshoot-windows-performance-issues-part-1/ |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:29:32 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
Does anyone know of a _simple_ process monitor, ideally with an adjustable threshold, that will show when anything (other than "System Idle Process") is using more than x% of CPU, _and show what it is_ (ideally with slight delay/prolongation)? I have (SysInternals) Process Explorer, but that - and even just Task Manager - are somewhat tedious to use in this way - especially for relatively (second or two) short-term peaks. [Shorter than that wouldn't bother me.] Ideally, I'm thinking of something with a _small_ window, that normally shows nothing (or some "all is well" indication), but shows the _name_ of the process when something goes above - I don't know, hence me wanting it to be adjustable, but say 10%? - CPU for more than a second or two. So when I'm doing relatively little, and the fan suddenly ramps up and then down again, I'm not left wondering "what caused that?" (I've thought of just using Task Manager [in CPU-sorted mode], and shrinking its window vertically, but that wouldn't really be satisfactory - not least because [AFAIK] you can't have it _not_ display System Idle Process, which would usually be at the top of the list.) Try either Process Lasso, or Process Tamer. |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
In message , Mayayana
writes: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote | So when I'm doing relatively little, and the fan suddenly ramps up and | then down again, I'm not left wondering "what caused that?" | Who ya gonna call? Ghost Busters! I don't have a suggestion, but I would note that it's not always something racing that ramps up my fan. We're having a heat wave lately. Sometimes it seems to speed up just to catch up. Or I might just start a program and that's enough to trigger it. Agreed; it's quite hot here too (28.8 a foot from the PC). But it usually _does_ seem to be related to CPU activity (in that if, when I hear the fan take off, I click either Task Manager or SpeedFan to bring them to the fore, I can see one of the cores is - or has just been - busy). If it were me I'd check task scheduler and services to make sure nothing unnecessary is set to run. Also check Autoruns. For instance, if you use Everything.exe then do you really need indexing enabled? I use Agent Ransack and haven't enabled indexing for many years. Since everything.exe has its own indexing, that seems like all the more reason to turn off the indexing service. Well, I often leave Everything running, and it seems to manage usually with near 00 CPU usage. In general, unless you have a lot of self-updating going on, there's rarely any reason for things to start of their own accord. I don't think I have anything at all on XP or 7 that runs without me starting it. (I guess AV scans would I wish I could (and did so wish back in XP days too). These days, you need the brain of a Paul or Mayayana or VanguardLH [possibly all three together!] to keep on top of all the processes the system runs, and to know whether they're necessary (or what else will break if I stop them, especially in the case of "services"). I do occasionally try, but feel it's a losing battle of whack-a-mole. Especially in this heat (-:! do that, but I also don't have AV installed.) On XP I've even disabled Task Scheduler, though 7 doesn't seem to allow me to do that. I have to do wacky things like schedule an unwanted task for 3 AM when I won't have the computer on. I just have AVG - yes, I know, I know, but it does the job and ICBA to argue the toss to find what else - on here, and I've never seen it grab much CPU power. (I had Avira when on XP.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf That's how he [Dr. Who] seems to me. He's always been someone who gets the /Guardian/. There are some parts of the universe where it's harder to get hold of. - Peter Capaldi (current incumbent Doctor), RT 2016/11/26-12/2 |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
In message , Ed Cryer
writes: [] If you untick "Show processes from all users" you lose SIP. Ed Thanks; I hadn't spotted that that wasn't one of mine. But Task Manager is both too slow and too fast anyway: too slow in that its refresh rate isn't great (and I think if I set it faster it would itself start to become a CPU hog - either that or it wouldn't go fast enough anyway), and too fast in that it usually _has_ lost whatever was causing the peak load by the time I look at it. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf That's how he [Dr. Who] seems to me. He's always been someone who gets the /Guardian/. There are some parts of the universe where it's harder to get hold of. - Peter Capaldi (current incumbent Doctor), RT 2016/11/26-12/2 |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
In message , Mark Blain
writes: [] Have you tried the built-in Resource Monitor (resmon.exe)? It doesn't meet your requirement to trigger at a particular level, but I've found it useful for identifying high CPU and high disk usage processes. Performance Monitor (perfmon.exe) can also be useful, if you add the "Process" counter and set the view to "Report", but it's not as simple to set up and use. https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/...2/02/01/using- resource-monitor-to-troubleshoot-windows-performance-issues-part-1/ Thanks. I haven't tried lately, but when I've tried with Process Explorer, Task Manager, Process Lasso, Resource Monitor, and so on, I've found it always rather too complicated to answer the question "what triggered that surge" - because it's usually abated (or abating) by the time I get to hunting. I know some of the tools - possibly including Resource Monitor - _do_ tell you what _was_ the cause (hover over the peaks in the graph, in at least one of them), but it's fiddly to do. Hence my emphasis on the word Simple. Though I suspect that even if I _was_ able to _easily_ establish what caused peaks, I'd still be in the dark, wondering _why_. (Unless it was something I could safely kill altogether except when I want it - and I suspect that's not going to be the case.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf That's how he [Dr. Who] seems to me. He's always been someone who gets the /Guardian/. There are some parts of the universe where it's harder to get hold of. - Peter Capaldi (current incumbent Doctor), RT 2016/11/26-12/2 |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
So when I'm doing relatively little, and the fan suddenly ramps up and then down again, I'm not left wondering "what caused that?" To check the fan RPM along with temperatures (CPU, GPU, case), I use Speedfan. There are probably other monitor-only tools but I need Speedfan because the BIOS fails to control the CPU fan (always has it run full speed). You could monitor the fan RPMs along with the temperatures associated to them (CPU temp for CPU fan, etc) to make sure it truly is a rise in temperature that causes the fan RPM to bounce up. It is possible something bumps up the fan speed independent of temperature. I'll have to think about a CPU usage threshold monitor for a bit. Still need some coffee. |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
VanguardLH wrote:
I'll have to think about a CPU usage threshold monitor for a bit. Still need some coffee. Found some with threshold alerts: http://www.softpedia.com/get/Interne...-Monitor.shtml http://www.majorgeeks.com/files/deta...and_alert.html I didn't check if they tell you which process had the highest CPU usage at the time; however, high overall CPU usage could be the result of multiple high-usage processes, especially since many programs use multiple processes. Also, could be the offender is a service that has been rolled into one of the svchost.exe processes which means having to use SysInternals' Process Explorer to dig into a svchost.exe instance to see which services were rolled into it (but that won't tell you which service caused the high CPU usage for that svchost.exe instance). For that type of monitoring, you'll probably want a CPU usage logger. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/...when-the-alert I think that is describing how to set a threshold alert in PerfMon. I don't know if you need a server edition of Windows for those types of alerts (since the articles that I saw about doing this referred to Windows Server alerts). https://www.vircom.com/blog/how-to-m...d-is-breached/ That also mentions using PerfMon to issue alerts. While that author has e-mail alerts sent to him, that would take too long for just a 2-second notification window. You could have the batch file do something else, like just show a message (echo and pause in a .bat file called by 'cmd.exe /k path\name.bat' that would hold open a command shell showing the message). |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote
| Agreed; it's quite hot here too (28.8 a foot from the PC). That's not hot. Recently it was in the 34-37 range here. (93-98F and humid) I actually ran into a couple from Manchester eating ice cream in Boston's Public Gardens. I was sitting in the shade, on a bench, having come from the local farmer's market and enjoying the new fashion which involves young women cutting their shorts so short that a couple inches of their ass is exposed. Compelling might be the best word to describe it. The Brits seemed unbothered by the heat. But they complained about prices. From what I could gather they'd been eating all week in the most expensive area of Boston, for fear of being mugged if they went on the subway. | together!] to keep on top of all the processes the system runs, and to | know whether they're necessary (or what else will break if I stop them, | especially in the case of "services"). You probably know about this, but just in case... http://www.blackviper.com/ You can look up all services there. It does take time, though. But something like indexing should be safe to stop if you don't need Windows search. |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
In message , VanguardLH
writes: J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: So when I'm doing relatively little, and the fan suddenly ramps up and then down again, I'm not left wondering "what caused that?" To check the fan RPM along with temperatures (CPU, GPU, case), I use Speedfan. There are probably other monitor-only tools but I need Speedfan because the BIOS fails to control the CPU fan (always has it run full speed). You could monitor the fan RPMs along with the I have Speedfan, mainly to use for its ability to look at temperatures; like you and your fans, I'm sure there are monitor-only temperature utilities, but SpeedFan does the job and I had it. For monitoring the fan, I find my ears suffice (-: temperatures associated to them (CPU temp for CPU fan, etc) to make sure it truly is a rise in temperature that causes the fan RPM to bounce up. It is possible something bumps up the fan speed independent of temperature. This is a laptop - only one fan. I think it's somewhere around the left of the keyboard - it certainly blows out the left side. It certainly _seems_ to follow temperature - but then temperature seems to follow CPU usage pretty closely too. I'll have to think about a CPU usage threshold monitor for a bit. Still need some coffee. Maybe a scrolling window of the highest-usage process names. With a little bit of memory (as a scrolling window would intrinsically have), so you can ask yourself "what caused that" (brief surge), rather than "what's causing that". -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf We need a reversal of the old saying: "DON'T do unto others as you would have them NOT do unto you." (Paraphrase from "The Moral Maze", 1998-11-21: it was an attempt - quite good I thought - to get a modern [and non-specific] version.) |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
In message , Mayayana
writes: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote | Agreed; it's quite hot here too (28.8 a foot from the PC). That's not hot. Recently it was in the 34-37 range here. Yes, but don't you have aircon? Most British homes don't. [] | together!] to keep on top of all the processes the system runs, and to | know whether they're necessary (or what else will break if I stop them, | especially in the case of "services"). You probably know about this, but just in case... http://www.blackviper.com/ You can look up all services there. It does take time, though. But something like indexing should be safe to stop if you don't need Windows search. One down (assuming I even _know_ whether I need Windows search or not), fifty-odd (guess) to go - and by the time I've researched one, at blackviper or elsewhere, including actually _understanding_ what I'm told there, how many others will have appeared ... (-: -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf We need a reversal of the old saying: "DON'T do unto others as you would have them NOT do unto you." (Paraphrase from "The Moral Maze", 1998-11-21: it was an attempt - quite good I thought - to get a modern [and non-specific] version.) |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote
| That's not hot. Recently it was in the 34-37 range here. | | Yes, but don't you have aircon? Most British homes don't. I don't use AC. We have fans. And we have a small window AC that we occasionally use if things get desperate -- like times when it goes over 100. I have AC in my newest pickup, but only partially use it. The problem with AC is that unless you use it all the time it's likely to do more harm than good. One has to keep re-acclimating between the heat and AC. Actually I rather like the heat. It's sensual and relaxing, after months of cold Winter, feeling chilled most of the time. But it can make one lethargic. It's true, though, that more people now use AC than used to. Central AC has become very popular in recent years. I guess it depends on what you're used to. When I once visited Britain in December it seemed like I could never get warm, even though I'm used to a much colder Winter. I wasn't used to the deep, damp chill of December in London. | [] | | together!] to keep on top of all the processes the system runs, and to | | know whether they're necessary (or what else will break if I stop them, | | especially in the case of "services"). | | You probably know about this, but just in case... | | http://www.blackviper.com/ | | You can look up all services there. It does take | time, though. But something like indexing should | be safe to stop if you don't need Windows search. | | One down (assuming I even _know_ whether I need Windows search or not), | fifty-odd (guess) to go - and by the time I've researched one, at | blackviper or elsewhere, including actually _understanding_ what I'm | told there, how many others will have appeared ... (-: It is a pain to go through them all. And each Windows version increases the number. Personally I think it's worth it. They only have to be sorted out once. Partly it's for orderliness and efficiency. Partly to corral the unrequested nonsense like printer software or iTunes crap that takes the liberty of setting up shop. I think Skype might run a service, too. Some things are very intrusive. But there's also a big security factor. Microsoft regard corporate customers as their customer base. SOHo users are a sideline. To that end, Windows is set up by default to be a corporate workstation. There are numerous services enabled by default that shouldn't be running on a standalone machine. It's an entirely different security model. With the standalone machine, the security approach is that the user is trusted while the network is not. A corporate workstation is the opposite: The network is trusted while the user is not. So Windows comes set up with extensive file access restrictions but with "the barn door open". Some of it is downright nuts. Remote Registry allows your Registry to be edited from another computer. COM+ allows executable components to be loaded remotely. Remote Desktop is commonly exploited by malware and phone scammers. All of the things that enable functionalty between computers are security risks on a SOHo computer that's not on a firewalled network. I have a package I made for XP that might be of some help. It doesn't include an update for services added in Win7, but it does provide a 1-stop way to check out running services and groups them by functionality, giving you some idea of whether you might need a particular service. https://www.jsware.net/jsware/xpfix.php5#who1 Black Viper also provides guidelines for setting up a computer based on your priorities: security, gaming, etc. It's up to you. If you just don't want to deal with it you might be able to solve your mystery with a process monitor of some kind. |
*SIMPLE* process monitor - for peaks?
In message , Mayayana
writes: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote | That's not hot. Recently it was in the 34-37 range here. | | Yes, but don't you have aircon? Most British homes don't. I don't use AC. We have fans. And we have a small [] Actually I rather like the heat. It's sensual and relaxing, after months of cold Winter, feeling chilled most of the time. But it can make one lethargic. Agreed on all points! (Where in the US _are_ you?) It's true, though, that more people now use AC than used to. Central AC has become very popular in recent years. I guess it depends on what you're used to. When I once visited Britain in December it seemed like I could never get warm, even though I'm used to a much colder Winter. I wasn't used to the deep, damp chill of December in London. You should try January or February in Northumberland, especially this year! (See https://rootsonwheels.com/2018/04/01...from-the-east/ for my visiting genealogical cousin's account.) Or, I'm sure, Scotland - but they're probably more prepared than we are. (Her preceding and following blogs are IMO good too, though skip the genealogy chapters.) [] | One down (assuming I even _know_ whether I need Windows search or not), | fifty-odd (guess) to go - and by the time I've researched one, at | blackviper or elsewhere, including actually _understanding_ what I'm | told there, how many others will have appeared ... (-: It is a pain to go through them all. And each Windows version increases the number. Personally I think it's worth it. They only have to be sorted out once. True, but it's a LONG haul. Partly it's for orderliness and efficiency. Partly to corral the unrequested nonsense like printer software or iTunes crap that takes the liberty of setting up shop. Exactly my feeling. But I'm getting tired of doing it (-:! I think Skype might run a service, too. Some things are very intrusive. But there's also a big security factor. Microsoft regard corporate customers as their customer base. SOHo users are a sideline. To that end, Windows is set up by default to be a corporate workstation. There are numerous services enabled by default that shouldn't be running on a standalone machine. It's an entirely different security model. With the standalone machine, the security approach is that the user is trusted while the network is not. A corporate workstation is the opposite: The network is trusted while the user is not. So Windows Yes, I've experienced that side as well: a third of a century with a large multinational mainly-defence contractor, and six months with an automotive electronics refurbisher. comes set up with extensive file access restrictions but with "the barn door open". Some of it is downright nuts. Remote Registry allows your Registry to be edited from another computer. COM+ allows executable components to be loaded remotely. Remote Desktop is commonly exploited by malware and phone scammers. All of the things that enable functionalty between computers are security risks on a SOHo computer that's not on a firewalled network. Trouble is, if I asked you for a list of what I can turn off, you'd be reluctant - as I would - to give one, as all our situations are different. And also, if one goes around turning off low-level things like services, Windows itself isn't as helpful in telling you what needs turning back on when something doesn't work as it is when you turn of something basic. (The ultimate is I think blocking things in the hosts file: you can spend _ages_ when something doesn't work and that's the cause.) I have a package I made for XP that might be of some help. It doesn't include an update for services added in Win7, but it does provide a 1-stop way to check out running services and groups them by functionality, giving you some idea of whether you might need a particular service. https://www.jsware.net/jsware/xpfix.php5#who1 I seem to have downloaded it on 2015-9-26 (I'm presuming it hasn't changed since then). Is it _safe_ to try under 7? And will I get much benefit - you know by now my approximate level of competence, and how much (or little) research I'm willing to do (has declined quite a bit in recent months)? Black Viper also provides guidelines for setting up a computer based on your priorities: security, gaming, etc. It's up to you. If you just don't want to deal with it I'm certainly _heading_ that way; touch (US: knock on, I think) wood, 7-32 (with Classic Shell) seems to just _work_ well enough for me, on this apparent four-core machine, for me most of the time. I _would_ like to get more control of it (as I had with 98SElite!), but the RoE (return on effort) seems to be declining. you might be able to solve your mystery with a process monitor of some kind. Or just ignore it - these peaks of fan activity _usually_ only last a few seconds. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf At the age of 7, Julia Elizabeth Wells could sing notes only dogs could hear. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:24 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2004 - 2006 PCbanter
Comments are property of their posters