fusk

UI hangs and becomes unresponsive as long as bandwidth usage is above ~180mbit, webui stops responding, crashes. IE: Just now, the UI hung for 5 min straight until speeds dropped below 100mbit. And then it crashed. Another bug. Even if connected to cached peers ie: 97/146, it will not download anything if utorrent thinks tracker is reporting 0/0. Have watched cached peers go from 0 to 60% without being allowed to download anything. When utorrent displays tracker status as 0/0 why is the "update tracker" button greyed out? Edit: 1 hour and 14 min, UT has managed to download 8mb. Still can't update tracker. UT thinks the tracker has reported 0/0, while there's 0/163 peers, and it is connected to 63. In reality the tracker reports 660/63 and any chance there was seeding anything on it is now gone. Because it has downloaded 8mb, i now can't just delete the torrent and have to download the remaining ~23.4gb.

Latest beta 45309 is equally as unstable as latest stable version, even at slower speeds ~170mbit it becomes highly unreliable.

Well, i've never been a raid person, but maybe raid0 would be something to consider. I have 2 seagate 750gb drives for games, movies, tv etc. That's where the majority of my torrents go. Or is it possible to set up a temp dir, as my c: is an ssd and i wouldn't mind if utorrent used 4gb as cache.

In which size? I guess i could benchmark it, ie. my d: have 31mb/s random 512k writes.

Yes, i thought it would be faster too, and i don't know why it can't write faster considering the write is from ram to hdd.

That could be a problem, creating a 4gb ramdisk would leave only 4gb ram for the rest of the system, and i would have to use that drive as a download directory, which means i'd have to empty it manually every few min if downloading larger files. I think ut 2.2.1 will do about 15 mb/s write speed. Atm i've limited ut to 22mb/s, with 1.8gb cache, that seems to work fine even for larger files. It's sad that i'm only using about 50% of the capacity.

So, if i understand correctly, RAMDrive is the same as a RAMdisk, and you're suggesting that i make a small portion of my ram into a drive, like g: drive. And used that as cache even tho it's the same hardware that handles both, and that should solve my problem? Just for clarification, i have 8gb ram, and 3x sata3 7200 rpm drives.

Use RAMDrive (==large "cache"). No cache will help you if the sum of your HD speed + uT IO processing logic/power is low. uT just have issues with handling multi-file torrents IO. Try a torrent with single file and you'll see that all is well. 3.4 might (eventually) help with that... Who knows... Not entirely sure how a RAMDrive would work or what ==large "cache" does. I know of RamDisk, but i don't see how that would help. And why wouldn't a larger cache help?. When the cache is full at 1.8gb the disk overloads and download slows to a crawl until it's done writing the entire cache to disk. If the cache was 4/5 gb this wouldn't happen with the majority of files being less than 10gb, excluding packs, games etc. Sure it would still happen in situations where you're downloading much larger files, but it would still be a big help. Most of my trackers only serve scene releases.

I use 2.2.1 As mentioned earlier. Stable No disk I/O and caching issues No ads No social features No streaming features No multimedia features No anti-virus integration Clean and fast UI. Faster: with 2.2.1 i can get speeds in the 300 mbit+ area with no problems. 3.x will rarely go 100 mbit+ Cons: Doesn't support 1.8 gb+ cache, why do i need that? Because i have 400 mbit+ and the harddrives overload as soon the cache is full. Having 4gb cache would be nice.