CPU running at between 96 and 100% all day

[RCC]

I have an HP with I-5 6400 cpu, 12gb RAM, blue iris version 4.5.3.0 x64. I am running 5 cameras -two at 4.1, two at 2.1 and one at 1.2mb. I was running an average of 85 percent CPU usage. I was able to get it down to 50 average percent by:

1) changing all cameras to Video-direct (camera properties - record tab - video file format and compression - direct to disk). Apparently one of my 4.1 cameras was using re-encode with settings,

I tried video H.262 Intel Hardware Decoding option. This setting lowered CPU usage by another 10-20 percent. Problem was I kept having issues with the motion sensor clips. I would not view them or trying to view them would lock up my blue iris program. I tried this option with one to all cameras with the same problem. It would affect some but not all clips.

Overall recording direct to disc seems to fix the problem.

 

[fenderman]

I have an HP with I-5 6400 cpu, 12gb RAM, blue iris version 4.5.3.0 x64. I am running 5 cameras -two at 4.1, two at 2.1 and one at 1.2mb. I was running an average of 85 percent CPU usage. I was able to get it down to 50 average percent by:

1) changing all cameras to Video-direct (camera properties - record tab - video file format and compression - direct to disk). Apparently one of my 4.1 cameras was using re-encode with settings,

I tried video H.262 Intel Hardware Decoding option. This setting lowered CPU usage by another 10-20 percent. Problem was I kept having issues with the motion sensor clips. I would not view them or trying to view them would lock up my blue iris program. I tried this option with one to all cameras with the same problem. It would affect some but not all clips.

Overall recording direct to disc seems to fix the problem.

That is still way to high for your load....make sure you have the latest intel driver and try hardware acceleration again (no vpp)...you should be at about 20 percent..
Are you logging in remotely? what are your frame rates set to?

 

[RCC]

That is still way to high for your load....make sure you have the latest intel driver and try hardware acceleration again (no vpp)...you should be at about 20 percent..
Are you logging in remotely? what are your frame rates set to?

Latest intel drives (updated by HP) Turned on hardware acceleration (no vpp) and cpu usage averages 40 percent. Not sure yet it this will affect motion detect video - as last times I changed hardware acceleration it created havoc with motion detection clips - program would sometimes lock up when trying to view motion detects. However, I am not sure it was with VPP or not. I tinkered with hardware acceleation several times. Even when I had just two camera running I ran about 30 percent average.

 

[RCC]

Latest intel drives (updated by HP) Turned on hardware acceleration (no vpp) and cpu usage averages 40 percent. Not sure yet it this will affect motion detect video - as last times I changed hardware acceleration it created havoc with motion detection clips - program would sometimes lock up when trying to view motion detects. However, I am not sure it was with VPP or not. I tinkered with hardware acceleation several times. Even when I had just two camera running I ran about 30 percent average.

Note: I do have high frame rates. The two 4.1mb cameras are running 20fps, one 2.1 is 25 fps, one 2.1 at 30fps and the 1.2 is 20 fps. I prefer high frame rate to stop motion/lagg affect. These frame rates tend to work. However, I can set some slightly lower.

 

[RCC]

Note: I do have high frame rates. The two 4.1mb cameras are running 20fps, one 2.1 is 25 fps, one 2.1 at 30fps and the 1.2 is 20 fps. I prefer high frame rate to stop motion/lagg affect. These frame rates tend to work. However, I can set some slightly lower.

I moved all the cameras down to 20 fps, not much change in CPU - now it is about 35 percent.

 

[fenderman]

Note: I do have high frame rates. The two 4.1mb cameras are running 20fps, one 2.1 is 25 fps, one 2.1 at 30fps and the 1.2 is 20 fps. I prefer high frame rate to stop motion/lagg affect. These frame rates tend to work. However, I can set some slightly lower.

there is no atop motion at 15fps..regardless, you still have very high usage..

 

[RCC]

there is no atop motion at 15fps..regardless, you still have very high usage..

It might have something to do with the resolution/mb. The 1.2(960) camera along uses 2percent CPU, 2.1 mg (1080) usees 9 percent, 4.1 (1520) 15 percent. I bet if I put them all down to 960 I might get 15-20 cpu usage.

However, the computer is a stand alone and does runs nothing else. It was a bargain computer I got at Fry's store for $450 about 6 months ago.

 

[RCC]

It might have something to do with the resolution/mb. The 1.2(960) camera along uses 2percent CPU, 2.1 mg (1080) usees 9 percent, 4.1 (1520) 15 percent. I bet if I put them all down to 960 I might get 15-20 cpu usage.

However, the computer is a stand alone and does runs nothing else. It was a bargain computer I got at Fry's store for $450 about 6 months ago.

However, with your help and this forum, I was able to get my cpu usage down to 35 percent vs the 85 percent. I can no longer hear the cpu fine whining. I think this is a success?

 

[fenderman]

It might have something to do with the resolution/mb. The 1.2(960) camera along uses 2percent CPU, 2.1 mg (1080) usees 9 percent, 4.1 (1520) 15 percent. I bet if I put them all down to 960 I might get 15-20 cpu usage.

However, the computer is a stand alone and does runs nothing else. It was a bargain computer I got at Fry's store for $450 about 6 months ago.

you are feeding about 13 megapixels...with that pc, you should be running at about 20 percent if everything is setup properly...
Also note that 450 is not a bargain on that pc...300 is what we pay around here for a business class i5-6500 pc with 3 year next business day warranty...
35 is good, but you can do better with hardware acceleration.

 

[RCC]

you are feeding about 13 megapixels...with that pc, you should be running at about 20 percent if everything is setup properly...
Also note that 450 is not a bargain on that pc...300 is what we pay around here for a business class i5-6500 pc with 3 year next business day warranty...
35 is good, but you can do better with hardware acceleration.

it was $799 without monitor on HP website when I checked it months ago. They now sell for about $699 on their website. However mine has 12 mg RAM the $699 has 8mg, but perhaps a better video card. Mine is a intel 530 chip (cheap).

 

[fenderman]

it was $799 without monitor on HP website when I checked it months ago. They now sell for about $699 on their website. However mine has 12 mg RAM the $699 has 8mg, but perhaps a better video card. Mine is a intel 530 chip (cheap).

The MSRP is not the proper way to gauge a good deal..rather, what else is available that is comparable...
Video card is worthless, even bad for BI...so you actually want the intel 530, you need it for hardware accleration

 

[RCC]

it was $799 without monitor on HP website when I checked it months ago. They now sell for about $699 on their website. However mine has 12 mg RAM the $699 has 8mg, but perhaps a better video card. Mine is a intel 530 chip (cheap).

I am going to wait and see if the H.262 Intel Hardware Decoding option turning on (without VPP) works. Again, it caused problems with clip recording before (but I not sure if the VPP was also on at those times). However, moving the new 4.1 mb camera direct to disc seem to be the biggest help. The others camera were already set direct to disc, but I had recently just installed the 4.1 mb and it must have defaulted to re-encode option, this giving me the 85 percent CPS usage. (ouch)

Note one of the 2.1 mb camers also pushes audio.

 

[RCC]

The MSRP is not the proper way to gauge a good deal..rather, what else is available that is comparable...
Video card is worthless, even bad for BI...so you actually want the intel 530, you need it for hardware accleration

Agree, I checked Amazon and Best Buy. Amazon came closet at $500, without monitor at the time, and I believed it might have been refurbished and possible an older model. A new exact model, Pavilion 500 now sells for $529. I was going to upgrade one of my older computers, but after a new video card(the one inside fried), more ram and getting Windows 10, I would have spent almost $300, and still had a substandard CPU and slow RAM. I went with Fry's as it was local and I could return it quickly, if needed. Of course, Amazon has a good return policy, also. I think I paid more like $399 for the computer and the salesman threw in a cheap monitor. I end up giving that to my son and already had a better HDMI monitor available.

 

[looney2ns]

Agree, I checked Amazon and Best Buy. Amazon came closet at $500, without monitor at the time, and I believed it might have been refurbished and possible an older model. A new exact model, Pavilion 500 now sells for $529. I was going to upgrade one of my older computers, but after a new video card(the one inside fried), more ram and getting Windows 10, I would have spent almost $300, and still had a substandard CPU and slow RAM. I went with Fry's as it was local and I could return it quickly, if needed. Of course, Amazon has a good return policy, also. I think I paid more like $399 for the computer and the salesman threw in a cheap monitor. I end up giving that to my son and already had a better HDMI monitor available.

Read this thread, especially the last page. where are you guys finding i7-6700 Dells under 500?