Would like a PVIEWER like in Windows 2000

Discussion in 'Windows Desktop Systems' started by Kevin Ar18, Aug 10, 2002.

  1. Kevin Ar18

    Kevin Ar18 OSNN Senior Addict

    Messages:
    300
    See this article:
    http://networking.earthweb.com/netos/article/0,,12083_746591,00.html

    According to it, Windows 2000 has a process viewer that not only lets you see how much cpu cycles each process is taking up, but also the individual threads. Is there anything like this I can use on my XP Home for free?

    I'd like to be able to view how much the individual dlls/threads on svchost are comsuming in terms of cpu cycles.


    ----------------------------------------------
    Addition note added after third post:

    Note, while Task Manager is very useful, I am actually referring to something more powerful.

    Each process listed in the Tast Manager is actually composed of 1 or more individual threads. See this definition.

    The problem is that the Task Manager does not show these individual threads that are a part of each process listed. Based on what I read about Windows 2000, it has a program called PVIEWER that is capable of not only showing all the processes like Task Manager does in XP, but also is capable of showing the threads that make up those processes.

    I have found other programs such as Process viewer which shows the threads, but none of them show the pecentage of CPU they are taking up.

    I'm sorry I don't have a better explanation, but I'm not quite sure about all the details myself. All I know is that there is more to the processes than what is shown in Task Manager and I would like to be able to view the CPU cycles for those little details.
     
  2. Iceman

    Iceman Moderator

    Messages:
    2,695
    cntrl alt delete, processes.

    :cool:
     
  3. Kevin Ar18

    Kevin Ar18 OSNN Senior Addict

    Messages:
    300
    Note: I updated my first post, and added the below desciption so people reading this thread in the future won't be confused as to the subject.

    Task Manager is very useful, however, it does not reveal everything. Let me see if I can clear up what I mean.

    Each process listed in the Tast Manager is actually composed of 1 or more individual threads. See this definition.

    The problem is that the Task Manager does not show these individual threads that are a part of each process listed. Based on what I read about Windows 2000, it has a program called PVIEWER that is capable of not only showing all the processes like Task Manager does in XP, but also is capable of showing the threads that make up those processes.

    I have found other programs such as Process viewer which shows the threads, but none of them show the pecentage of CPU they are taking up.

    I'm sorry I don't have a better explanation, but I'm not quite sure about all the details myself. All I know is that there is more to the processes than what is shown in Task Manager and I would like to be able to view the CPU cycles for those little details.
     
  4. Kevin Ar18

    Kevin Ar18 OSNN Senior Addict

    Messages:
    300
    Some additional information.
    In addition to the above post on "threads", most Process Viewer programs provide you with a list of "modules" that make up each of the processes listed in the Task Manager. I'm not exactly sure what they are. If you want, see the definition here. However, they are kind of like additions to the main exe program (some absolutely necessary, and some not).
    For example, internet explorer on my computer has over 30 modules such as one that handles blocking ads, another one that handles plugins, and several that integrates my antivirus protection... As you can see the one that does plugins would be very much needed. The antivirus and adblocking were added in by other programs and are thus removable.
    These modules are actually what I was looking for in the first place - if it was possible to look at how many CPU cycles each module was consuming; however, it's probably not possible for modules, so I didn't bother mentioning them.