Screencap of my CPU Usage while printing

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by The Green Bastard, Dec 3, 2005.

  1. The Green Bastard

    The Green Bastard Click click click bang

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    80,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, Nova Scotia
    [​IMG]


    Bogging terribly while printing, and printing slowly....

    Any ideas?

    2.4 P4, XP Pro, 512 MB Ram, Deskjet 842 on a parallel cable.
     
  2. MrMan

    MrMan New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know the specifications of the printer, but I'm guessing that it does not have a lot of built-in memory in it, and is also using the parallel cable. This means that your computer would have to load part of [what you want to print out] through the cable, into the printer. The printer then has to print that section, clear out its memory, and wait for the computer to send more. The computer meanwhile, is waiting for the printer say it is ready to accept more input, and then proceeds to send more data. The parallel port is just slower than the USB cable, so data is sent slower.
     
  3. darnit

    darnit New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    0
    512 MB Ram!!
    and using xp pro!!
    your lucky you can even sneeze in the same room without bogging down your system!!
    ohh and using a parrelle port too!!!
    BTW how old is the printer?
     
  4. borborygmus

    borborygmus Guest

    WTF are you smoking, XP Pro will run fine on his system :ugh:

    reinstall print drivers with the newest ones TGB, maybe hook up via USB (if that is an option)
     
  5. The Green Bastard

    The Green Bastard Click click click bang

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    80,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, Nova Scotia
    :squint: @ your blabbering about 512MB.
    The printer is 5 years old, but it's fucking bullletproof. I did tech support for HP and never once had hardware calls on this machine, only ink and software.

    I should get a USB cable...it has that option.
     
  6. badguy106

    badguy106 Location:Tn

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    0
    :rofl: I have been running 512 with xp pro for awhile without any problems.
     
  7. darnit

    darnit New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    0
    512 will work, but he also hasn't posted his processes. And I personally will never run xp pro with less than 1 gig.
    Also take into account the usb/par cable fact.
    my xp pro with very few process runs about 180 megs,WITHOUT printing. and CPU usage does not equal memory,but having more memory does mean less draw on the cpu when you do run something...
     
  8. The Green Bastard

    The Green Bastard Click click click bang

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    80,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, Nova Scotia
    I have 30 process running with ff closed. I should do some cleansing.

    And it's XP Pro Nearly Naked edition too...
     
  9. deezil

    deezil New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,968
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murray, KY
    USB cable wins. Paralell support in XP blows donkey cock.
     
  10. The Green Bastard

    The Green Bastard Click click click bang

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    80,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, Nova Scotia
    :noes:
     
  11. dorkultra

    dorkultra OT's resident crohns dude OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    22,743
    Likes Received:
    27
    Location:
    yinzer / nilbog, trollhio
    i ran xp pro for years on 512 of ram...no problems, i only recently went up to a gig because i found a good deal
     
  12. darnit

    darnit New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    0
    thats awesome.. but for some people and the number of processes they have running it will make the comp hang. Then to use a par. print set up as well.. since everything is run in memory, and a slow print set up, plus 30 process, and what if your running iexplorer(normaly 30 megs), etc..
    I mean your dumping all the print stuff into your on board ram.. and it will pile up, waiting to go to the printer, and then it has to clear, and the CPU is trying to constantly send, and clear.
    So IMO you could either go usb and it should stop the hang, or add another stick of mem, since it is really cheap now anyways.
     
  13. borborygmus

    borborygmus Guest

    darnit, I ran XP pro for 2 years on a box with an athlon 700mHz processor and 384mb RAM, and it worked fucking fine for me...

    ...until I installed firefox :o
     
  14. brent s

    brent s OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2004
    Messages:
    73,962
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    LOL @ the porn files in the background. :rofl:
     
  15. Kieffer87

    Kieffer87 Orly OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Where the Green Grass Grows
    :Owned:
     
  16. The Green Bastard

    The Green Bastard Click click click bang

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    80,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunnyvale, Nova Scotia
  17. peerk

    peerk New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    984
    Likes Received:
    0
    I ran XP for a long time on 256MB of RAM. And it was very usable for web browsing/word processing.
     
  18. Teh Jebus

    Teh Jebus Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    24,081
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    I ran XP Pro on a 750 Duron with 256 megs of ram for several years. It got bogged down at times, but most of the time it was fine. So 512 is definately fine for runing his system.
     
  19. bptillman

    bptillman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,966
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    god all your people saying you need more than 512 to run windows xp are dumb....Ive even run it on 256 PERFECTLY fine....you would have to be running a lot of shit constantly to need a full gig and actually use it...otherwise you just have an extra 512 just sitting in your computer doing NOTHING

    end rant
     
  20. deezil

    deezil New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,968
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murray, KY
    :werd: it'll run perfectly on a Pentium 3 - 1GHz machine with 256 MB of RAM. We run ~150 boxes like that at work.
     
  21. Sirkraker

    Sirkraker New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2005
    Messages:
    378
    Likes Received:
    0
    print server
     

Share This Page