hi On Fri, 9 Jul 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > On Mon, 5 Jul 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> I upgraded to xmms and I'd like to go back to x11amp. > >> xmms uses about 30% of my 233cyrix's cycles. > > > > that looks like quite consistent number. On my cyrix-333 > > i usually got 18-19%. > > I installed the latest unstable xmms and cpu usage > is reported as ~15% now, half of what it was. At > 30% it noticably slowed down other processes on my > 233. umm... interesting... using mpg123 i got around 18%, maybe a bit less. Splay numbers are about two points higher. Mpg123 claims to be fastest decoder and that claim is consistent with my observation. Thank you for the info, i'll try xmms and take a look at the load > > > > >> I don't > >> think x11amp used more than a couple percent. > > > > i believe it was bug in x11amp - it reports CPU usage wrongly. > > It is probably fixed by now... > > Did it fool xosview as well? The utilities I used > to monitor cpu usage all showed almost no load when > only x11amp was running. I have no clue how > accurate any of them are though. > > It's not a problem now anyhow. Xmms is a nice > piece of work and I don't feel guilty about > letting it run in the background all the time > now. great... But i believe there are problems with utilities, especially dealing with MT programs. Aren't xmms heavely multithreaded? > > Frank > OK
