Opened 17 years ago
Closed 16 years ago
#456 closed defect (invalid)
CPU of host is going to 100% using XP as guest
| Reported by: | markba | Owned by: | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Component: | other | Version: | VirtualBox 1.4.0 |
| Keywords: | Cc: | ||
| Guest type: | other | Host type: | other |
Description
I'm using Ubuntu Feisty as host. After upgrading from 1.3.8 to 1.4.0, my XP session caused the host CPU to 100%. Before that, using 1.3.8, this combination (Feisty host, XP guest) was working perfectly. This situation is not workable for me, so I guess I'll downgrade to 1.3.8.
Other sessions like Ubuntu Feisty are working as expected.
Change History (8)
comment:1 by , 17 years ago
comment:2 by , 17 years ago
Did you enable USB in the guest? I recall that Windows 2000 doesn't power down the USB controller when it's not doing anything. That can cause a high cpu load.
Note that this doesn't apply to XP. Nevertheless you might want to disable USB to see if it makes any difference.
comment:4 by , 17 years ago
Tried the following with *no* effect:
- upgraded Geust additions from 1.3.8 to 1.4.0
- removed shared folders
comment:5 by , 17 years ago
Recently upgraded to 1.5. CPU of the host is not 100% anymore, but somewhere between 30-40%. This is much better, but not as good as 1.3.8, where it can drop to almost zero.
comment:6 by , 17 years ago
I figured it out. It was F-Prot, my anti-virus tool. I use AVG now, and CPU drops to (almost) zero.
As far as I'm concerned, you can close this bug, provided you don't want to investigate further, maybe for other users who cannot get rid of f-prot.
comment:8 by , 16 years ago
| Resolution: | → invalid |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
Closing as obsolete. Please reopen if it still applies to VirtualBox 1.5.6.
I am also experiencing 100% utilization of one of my host's cores when VB is running with windows 2000 as a guest, on 1.4 with the 1.4 guest additions.
Was getting the same thing on 1.3.8 though, hoping 1.4 would fix it. Because of the two cores my host remains usable but I don't want to leave things this way. Usage actually _drops_ when the guest is doing things, presumably when it gets i/o bound etc.