uTorrent developers thought 100% CPU usage is funny?

Hi,

As you probably acknowledged, this is a pretty straight forward question: why 100% CPU usage on uTorrent version 3, when version 2 was already well build?

1) This is a feature of some kind? Kill the processor while downloading?

2) And why the interface is changed and now I can't even go from a torrent to another, with the keyboard arrows, without the visual part hanging?

It's like: press the down key, wait 1 second and then show the torrent information.

3) As a last thing: why did they changed the way "play" button worked?

Now the thing looks bad and it's part of the things that choke the interface, as I was talking above. And the stupid part is that it doesn't really work anymore! You hit play and select "Windows default player / application" or something like that, and in response, uTorrent says no application is found on the system...

What happened with the "light, ultra-fast" torrent client?

P.S.: Please don't respond with things like "have you checked the firewall/antivirus?" or "have you tried disassembling the windows kernel?"

Usually I know what I'm doing...

So no person here is having these problems with uTorrent 3 ?

yes, a lot of people are (including me), I just wish the developers would leave a post with a simple "We are working on it stop bitching about it" and we could stop worrying about it.

And they say: We don't support 2.04, please install the latest version. Isn't enought Firefox eat my days.

How to install utorrent 3 when with 2.0.4 only problem that i have and you can have is that freeze 4 seconds only when i use option delete torrent+ data.

In rest no problem: No cpu usage problem, no ugly U.I, no download speed and upload problem, maxim upload works 24/24( download maxim when i have default settings, when i disable dht , even are 1000 seeders(connected at 400) i loose like 300 kp from speed) , no other functions that i need, even if they are sure are bugs.

We're actually working on performance improvements for 3.1, but 3.0 doesn't really consume that much more CPU while downloading. The GUI's definitely a bit slower to render though.

I constantly get 100% CPU and low virtual memory warning with uTorrent 3.0, which really isn't "Super fast. Ultra light". The only thing I like about 3.0 is the streaming feature, everything else is downgraded from the last version IMO. Not to mention the ugly GUI.

What firewall are you using?

Running out of memory while using uT isn't normal, and is most likely due to third party security software.

>>Firon

don't want to argue with you Sr. but uTorrent3 does have serious CPU consumption, in my case no problem with Ram but all of sudden it start to eat CPU like a mother.....er.

but thanks for keeping us posted.

Hey guys, cheer up

I located the problem and solved it ,

in my case I've got the same problem newly

the problem is a miscalculation of a torrent file data

since the utorrent allocates space for that file it needs its information and its downloaded parts and left parts ...

all that is saved in a dat file inside the torrent folder (which contained an error)

unfortunately I had to loose my progress in the download to solve this issue

i had to delete the dat file in order to make utorrent analyze the available data and create a new one but it couldn't just do that and kept hanging (not responding and rewinding everything done in the ui window (like stopping, deleting, changing .. )

so i had to delete the torrent with the data and torrent file (remove and delete data + torrent )

restart utorrent and add the torrent again and start over ..

it should be a newly added torrent

another way to locate that torrent is to do a force re-check for them one by one and the corrupted one will force the app to hang and not response ..

I hope this may help ..

regards,

The only reason I installed 3.0 was for the utorrent remote app, which doesn't work. The added cpu drain is just a bonus:(

>>Firon

don't want to argue with you Sr. but uTorrent3 does have serious CPU consumption, in my case no problem with Ram but all of sudden it start to eat CPU like a mother.....er.

but thanks for keeping us posted.

Have you tried closing the GUI when it's running? That generally brings the CPU levels back to normal for me. You can also try toggling net.low_cpu.

Mr. Firon,

I've just told you the solution and u still say try ui and low_cpu ?

obviously the problem is bigger than that

I already tried both and failed do solve it this way

the problem is in one of the torrent files data .. as i mentioned earlier

good luck to everyone

Without providing a sample torrent that is likely to trigger things, we have no way to test.

what are you talking about

there is no sample, it just happens with utorrent's miscalculation of the data on the drive and the analyzed data .. it just happens .. and it is the first time I got this issue in years ..

And that assumption is based on what exactly?

what are you talking about

there is no sample, it just happens with utorrent's miscalculation of the data on the drive and the analyzed data .. it just happens .. and it is the first time I got this issue in years ..

I don't believe what you're discussing has anything to do with this.

based on that it solved the problem which was almost impossible to solve with any other way mentioned on the internet even in utorrent FAQ page ..

it is a logical problem generated from the information gathered by u torrent .. simply id depends on this data and doesn't check the facts around it , even rechecking depends on the dat file which has the analyzed data . what if you have half of the downloaded file (regardless of the packets distribution) and deleted the dat file , can utorrent generate a new one by analyzing the available data ?

the answer is no as I tested that before I sacrifice the progress of the download to solve the problem

wth it is just 17 gbs which i can download again. but the basic idea utorrent didn't make it easy for the user .

oh and btw it is the same problem .. cpu goes up in my case to >70% for each core .. that's why it is related to this

Except that both you and the original poster have given us no useful information with which to troubleshoot, and not enough information for you to be able to claim that the issue is the same.

and Mr.Firon,

with due respect I can't retrace the problem and tell you in which block it s in the code

but i can tell it is in the architecture of the software and only its developers can fix ..

I just wanted to give the others some solution because there is none that works on the internet ..

regards,

Closed due to hijacking. Seriously, none of you have given enough information to genuinely link to the original post.