Descriptive Problem Summary:
Well, I've noticed that since version 463, the CPU usage of Dream Daemon increased pretty much significantly. In version 462 and below, my game would make DD use 0% of my CPU with 1 idle player logged in, and it would continue to use 0% as more idle players log in.
Now, in version 463, 1 idle player would make the DD's CPU usage increase to 2-3% and it will keep hovering at 2-3% while the player is doing nothing but sitting around. Then, if I log in a second idling player, the CPU usage will raise to hover around 3-4%. A third idle player and it will hover around 4-5%. You get the picture. It would become pretty laggy with a lot of players logged in.
Numbered Steps to Reproduce Problem:
- Install version 463;
- Host a game in Dream Daemon;
- Log in to the game;
- Monitor the CPU usage;
- Log in a second player;
- Monitor the CPU again;
- Log in a third player;
- Monitor the CPU again;
- etc...
Code Snippet (if applicable) to Reproduce Problem:
none
Expected Results:
The CPU usage will stay at 0% when only idle players are logged in.
Actual Results:
The CPU usages raises with 1% for every idle player.
Does the problem occur:
Every time? Or how often? Every time.
In other games? Yes, I presume.
In other user accounts? Most likely.
On other computers? Unable to test this; only have one computer.
When does the problem NOT occur?
It always does.
Did the problem NOT occur in any earlier versions? If so, what was the last version that worked? (Visit
http://www.byond.com/download/build to download old versions for testing.)
462 and below.
Workarounds:
Uninstall 463 and install an earlier version.
In addition, for those percentages to be meaningful we would have to know more about the makeup of your system: what sort of processor it's using, etc. Which game you're using also does matter; obviously we expect usage to vary between different games, and it might be that some games are using features that are more CPU-heavy than others. Without any of this data we don't have anything we can actually investigate. For these reasons it probably would have been best to continue this discussion on the developer forums.
I also suggest trying this without Firefox 3.6 running, if you had it up at the time, because Nadrew has noticed issues with programs co-running with Firefox 3.6 and my own experiences with that version have been disastrous.