Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!metro!kwanon!andy From: andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy Newman) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: Amiga system usage statistics (AmigaDOS 1.3) Message-ID: <1991Mar26.033402.2720@research.canon.oz.au> Date: 26 Mar 91 03:34:02 GMT Article-I.D.: research.1991Mar26.033402.2720 References: <1991Mar25.161731.29334@odin.diku.dk> Sender: andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy Newman) Reply-To: andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy Newman) Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia Lines: 20 In article <1991Mar25.161731.29334@odin.diku.dk> bombadil@diku.dk (Kristian Nielsen) writes: > >BTW, I suspect that Xoper isn't that accurate in its timings... On my GVP >28Mhz 3001 it likes to report that input.device is using about 40% of >CPU-time at full load (ray-tracing or similar). I really don't hope that >this is the case! (and if it is, how is a stock A500/2000 to run at all??) >Any comments on this? > Is that 40% of the total CPU or 40% of the actual CPU usage, Xoper can report both. On my A1000 Xoper reports that input.device is consuming around 15% of the total CPU when no user input events are occuring (keyboard or mouse) and around 30% when I bang on the keyboard or move the mouse. Anyone have an explanation? Is input.device using timers to wake itself up every now and then? -- Andy Newman (andy@research.canon.oz.au) Canon Info. Systems Research Australia "X: 2. An over-sized, over-featured, over-engineered window system developed at MIT and widely used on UNIX systems." from the jargon file.