[smax013]

coastie65 said:

The clock could be due to the CMOS battery going bad and needing changing. coastie

Not if it is happening while the computer is on.

I would say that your computer is set to the wrong time zone and is using a time server. You "correct" the time, but then the computer likely "phones" the time server at three and corrects your "correct" time. I am guessing that if you check the time zone, it is likely wrong and if you put in the right time zone, the clock will be "fixed". Assuming you are in the US, I am assuming you are somewhere in the Eastern time zone and the computer is set to the Pacific time zone (note...in my experience most computers set to Pacific by default.

[coastie65]

Good catch smax. I'm not all here right now. coastie

[smax013]

coastie65 said:

Good catch smax. I'm not all here right now. coastie

Perfectly understandable.

[SpiritWind]

Hi :

"Cyber-Defender" is considered a borderline "Rogue" program and should be AVOIDED .

Someone else Posted in these Forums requesting Help in uninstalling that program

which could ONLY be accomplished by running the FREE "Revo Uninstaller" in SAFE

Mode .

Therefore, I consider Its "MyIdentity Defender in the same "category" ; an Example of One's

"unhappiness" with it is at www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/cyberdefender-my-identity-defender-c121769.html .

Possibly the "Presence" of these 2 programs are the Source of your problems !?

[skicrazer]

OK, so I'm the village idiot on the time zone thing. It was set to PST...now changed to EST. Thanks on that one!



I also booted in safe mode and uninstalled cyberdefender/myidentydefender (same program) with Revo and ran CCleaner and got rid of a lot more files and registry entries. Now, back in normal mode, it doesn't seem any better. :-( .. I'm going to go work with non-web apps and see if they also have issues that I just hadn't picked up beforehand.

[smax013]

skicrazer said:

OK, so I'm the village idiot on the time zone thing. It was set to PST...now changed to EST. Thanks on that one!

Not a problem. Sometimes we are so close the problem that is happening to us that the same things don't jump out at us as they do to others. The exact 3 hour change is what jumped out to me. Sounded like a time zone thing when talking even integer number of hours.

[skicrazer]

So, I ran Malwarebytes Antimalware and it found 2 registry keys and 1 registry value infected, all BHO's. I can't remember, but I did install an app that uses BHO's.



That said, it doesn't seem to have fixed the problem, as I'm still hitting 100% CPU, though maybe it's a little better.

[SnyperTodd]

It's very common for malware to manifest itself as Browser Helper Objects, or BHOs. Did you do the quick scan or thorough scan?

[skicrazer]

Thorough scan. I first became aware of BHO's in my last job, where we used them for a desktop app. Are they basically lite-weight plug-in's? How do they "help" a browser?



Any reason it won't let me post any more graphics? I get the new tab, but the page flashes the file input field and Browse button, and then automatically acts like I clicked OK (or whatever the button is) and presents the Upload Now hyperlink, when I haven't provided a file name.

[smax013]

skicrazer said:

Any reason it won't let me post any more graphics? I get the new tab, but the page flashes the file input field and Browse button, and then automatically acts like I clicked OK (or whatever the button is) and presents the Upload Now hyperlink, when I haven't provided a file name.

It may be an issue with the forum software/server...I believe the issue has been brought to the attention of the "powers that be" as others have had similar issues.

[mphenterprises]

skicrazer said:

Any reason it won't let me post any more graphics? I get the new tab, but the page flashes the file input field and Browse button, and then automatically acts like I clicked OK (or whatever the button is) and presents the Upload Now hyperlink, when I haven't provided a file name.

>
>




Hi SkiCrazer. As SMax mentioned, there have been issues with the forum and Bill, the PCWorld Community Technician is investigating the issues. However, I am able to add screen shots and snippets with no problem. Here is a snippet of my Desktop in Windows Vista: (Click on the image to enlarge it.)




I am using Mozilla Firefox. What browser are you using?

[skicrazer]

Interesting that you can post pics. Did you use the Insert/edit image icon on this text entry's toolbar? I'm using IE 7.0.



I think I'm finding that the max CPU issue isn't only a browser problem. I noticed that Malwarebytes also hit 99% CPU at one point, during the shorter scan and was well above 50% most of the time, except for when battling IE for resources. (For some reason, it uses less CPU in the longer scan, which I am doing now - nothing found in the quick scan and nothing in the current one, which should be done soon).



BTW, I like the pic - love mountain life...or vacationing, at least!

[mphenterprises]

skicrazer said:

>

Quote

Interesting that you can post pics. Did you use the Insert/edit image icon on this text entry's toolbar? I'm using IE 7.0.

>
>



Yup. That is exactly what I used. It works, at least for me, in both Windows Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox. I think I may have a theory. I use Plain Text as my editor. Let me switch over to Rich Text and try again...











This image is of one of my cars I use in Need for Speed Carbon. I am still using Rich Text. Let's see if it loads....

[mphenterprises]

Here is an upload, in Rich Text, while using Internet Explorer:

[mphenterprises]

skicrazer said:

I think I'm finding that the max CPU issue isn't only a browser problem. I noticed that Malwarebytes also hit 99% CPU at one point, during the shorter scan and was well above 50% most of the time, except for when battling IE for resources. (For some reason, it uses less CPU in the longer scan, which I am doing now - nothing found in the quick scan and nothing in the current one, which should be done soon).

I have not been following this Discussion closely. Let me review the previous pages to get up to speed and then provide some feedback.

[mphenterprises]

Okay, I reviewed all the previous posts. As previously stated, you have received some excellent suggestions. I have some questions for you:

skicrazer said:

When I received the PC a few months ago, I wiped it clean with "Derek's boot and nuke" then loaded the OS needed software...I switched to this PC (which was given to me by my mother in law...virtumonde virus and all - the reason for the nuke and boot).

>
>


- I would presume that this computer did not come with either a recovery partition or Recovery Discs, correct?

- Just to cover all bases, is the Operating System that you installed genuine or downloaded from the internet? The reason I ask is that if the Operating System is genuine, you would have no need to run any third party application to "nuke" the hard drive. The Operating System CD does that on the front end.

skicrazer said:

I have a Systemax Venture PC with a Celeron 2.53 GHz processor, 608MB of RAM

As pointed out by several members, the physical memory of this computer is on the low end. The bare minimum for Windows XP is about 256MBs but for a computer to run more efficiently, 1GB is a industry minimum. Based on the information provided, I would say that this computer has two memory chips installed: one (1) 512MB memory chip and one (1) 128MB memory chip with 32MBs of memory shared for video purposes.

- What is the model number of this computer so we can investigate possible memory upgrades?

- Have you investigated increasing the virtual memory of the computer to compensate for the low physical memory?

skicrazer said:

I'm only using IE 7.0, and have uninstalled the other browsers, plus any other "extra sw" from the system.

>
>


- Since you are still having issues while using just one browser, have you attempted to uninstall Internet Explorer 7 and revert back to Internet Explorer 6?

skicrazer said:

I had performance issues when Time Warner Cable introduced the CA security suite...But, I also ditched cable internet for DSL

>
>


- Is Time Warner still your Internet Service Provider or is it another carrier?

- Have you contacted the ISP to determine if the single strength of your DSL service is strong?





My initial theory: The fact that this issue only occurs when using various browsers, coupled with the fact that streaming video is choppy, leads me to believe that this is definitely a lack of resources issue.

[skicrazer]

Hi mphenterprises. Thanks for the detailed inquiry. Following are my answers and comments. (I couldn't get the quote tool to play nice, so sorry if it's a bit messy).



"I would presume that this computer did not come with either a recovery partition or Recovery Discs, correct? "

"Just to cover all bases, is the Operating System that you installed genuine or downloaded from the internet? The reason I ask is that if the Operating System is genuine, you would have no need to run any third party application to "nuke" the hard drive. The Operating System CD does that on the front end. "



No recovery partitions or discs. That was why I nuked it and then loaded a student version of XP Pro, obtained from a friend. Since I'm not a student, I thought I should go ahead and buy a new version of XP Pro, which I did, but it wouldn't load correctly. So, figuring I've got a real license, I loaded the student version back on and that has worked. I nuked the HD each time I switched back and forth from the new XP and the student version (while trying to figure out if it was me or the new one was bad).



"As pointed out by several members, the physical memory of this computer is on the low end. The bare minimum for Windows XP is about 256MBs but for a computer to run more efficiently, 1GB is a industry minimum. Based on the information provided, I would say that this computer has two memory chips installed: one (1) 512MB memory chip and one (1) 128MB memory chip with 32MBs of memory shared for video purposes."

Actually, I think 32 of the 128MB are bad, though you could be right about the video part. I'm not sure. It originally had 2x128MB, but my mother-in-law complained about it being too slow, so I replaced one 128 with a 512. I wasn't sure why only 96 or the 128 was used, but 608MB seemed like it should be enough. Could the memory card be bad and causing CPU issues? I plan to upgrade to 1GB (another 512 card), but if it's not using all of the RAM and the CPU is maxing out, it wouldn't seem to be an insufficient RAM problem, would it? (maybe so - ?)



"Have you investigated increasing the virtual memory of the computer to compensate for the low physical memory? "

No, I hadn't. I just checked and it is 912MB- 1824MB on the C: drive. I added the same amount on my secondary drive (which wasn't on the system when the problems started.)



"Since you are still having issues while using just one browser, have you attempted to uninstall Internet Explorer 7 and revert back to Internet Explorer 6? "

No...I was having the issues with FF and Safari, too, before. Didn't even know you could uninstall IE.

My initial theory: The fact that this issue only occurs when using various browsers, coupled with the fact that streaming video is choppy, leads me to believe that this is definitely a lack of resources issue.

As far as my internet connection, it's now AT&T DSL, 1.5MB down, 384KB up, confirmed pretty closely via cnet and PCPitstop speed tests. I really don't think it's the ISP, as the browser task bar shows "Done" but the page hasn't been presented yet, and the task manager tray icon is full-green indicating 100% CPU utilization. Also, video is choppy even when the download bar is far ahead of the playback indicator, though it is fine when a local file is played back on Win Media Player.



Are there any dedicated memory areas (other than RAM and HD) closer to the CPU that could be messed up? It's a Celeron 2.53GHz on a U8668-D ver 5.B (Biostar? www.biostar-usa.com/mbdetails.asp?model=u8668+d ) mother board.



Thanks for the detailed inquiry. Very helpful in helping me thoroughly check what I have.

[mphenterprises]

skicrazer said:

(I couldn't get the quote tool to play nice, so sorry if it's a bit messy).

No Worries. The forum has its quirks. We can just work around them. That being said, I am not sure you will like my responses too much. :(

skicrazer said:

That was why I nuked it and then loaded a student version of XP Pro, obtained from a friend. Since I'm not a student, I thought I should go ahead and buy a new version of XP Pro, which I did, but it wouldn't load correctly. So, figuring I've got a real license, I loaded the student version back on and that has worked.

This is a major issue. Since you are not a student you really cannot use a student version of Windows XP. Also, your friend should not have lent you that version of Windows XP in the first place. Any single license version of Windows can only be installed on one computer. In addition, I do not think there is such a version as a student version of Windows XP Professional. I could be wrong but I think the student version of Windows XP is strictly Windows XP.

That being said, since you did buy a retail version of Windows XP Professional, that is the version that should be on this computer. If installing it is giving you problems, that would be where our attentions should lie.

As I mentioned, the Windows CD does all the grunt work on the front end so no boot and nuke process is necessary. Above everything else, my belief is that, as it stands now, you are running a computer with an illegal installation of Windows.

skicrazer said:

Could the memory card be bad and causing CPU issues? I plan to upgrade to 1GB (another 512 card), but if it's not using all of the RAM and the CPU is maxing out, it wouldn't seem to be an insufficient RAM problem, would it? (maybe so - ?)

>



Good question. No, I do not believe the memory chip is bad. In most cases that I have seen, if a memory card is bad, it just would not be read by the computer. That is not to say that the newly inserted 512MB memory chip is not damaged in some way.

When you inserted the memory, did you have a heard time placing it in the DIMM slot? Did it bend or chip in anyway? [color="#ff0000"]Also[/color], one of my previous questions was missed. What is the model number of this computer so we can investigate possible memory upgrades? This will help us determine if a memory increase is even feasible.

skicrazer said:

No, I hadn't. I just checked and it is 912MB- 1824MB on the C: drive. I added the same amount on my secondary drive (which wasn't on the system when the problems started.)

The virtual memory should be 1.5-2 times the size of the physical memory. That is exactly where your virtual memory is set so that is fine.

skicrazer said:

Didn't even know you could uninstall IE.

Yes, it is definitely possible. I thought I had a Document that outlined the steps but I cannot find it. Essentially, In Windows XP, Windows Internet Explorer 7 is an installed application. To uninstall it, simply:

- Go to Add or Remove Programs and scroll down to "Windows Internet Explorer 7."

- Click Remove

- Once the process is complete, you will be prompted to restart the computer

- Once the computer is restarted, the computer will have the default Internet Explorer 6


I will create a formal Document on this shortly.




Also, video is choppy even when the download bar is far ahead of the playback indicator, though it is fine when a local file is played back on Win Media Player.



I take it you mean streaming video is choppy. Well, that is normally an indication that the internet connection speed is not fast enough to maintain a steady "stream." Normally, anything below a constant 1Mbps will chop. I have rarely seen this issue be associated to a bad video card.





Unfortunately, all of this is moot because of the fact that you are using an illegal version of the Operating System in that computer. Before you do anything else, I would advise you to remove the student version of Windows XP from the computer and attempt to install the retail version of Windows XP Professional. Whatever problems you have with that can be addressed in another Discussion. Since this Discussion is so deep at this point, I will have to confer with Krissy, the Community Manager and Bill, the PCWorld Community Technician to see if we can allow this Discussion to continue.

[smax013]

[quote name='mphenterprises']
> [quote name='skicrazer']
>
> (I couldn't get the quote tool to play nice, so sorry if it's a bit messy).
>

No Worries. The forum has its quirks. We can just work around them. That being said, I am not sure you will like my responses too much. :(





>

skicrazer said:

>
> That was why I nuked it and then loaded a student version of XP Pro, obtained from a friend. Since I'm not a student, I thought I should go ahead and buy a new version of XP Pro, which I did, but it wouldn't load correctly. So, figuring I've got a real license, I loaded the student version back on and that has worked.
>
This is a major issue. Since you are not a student you really cannot use a student version of Windows XP. Also, your friend should not have lent you that version of Windows XP in the first place. Any single license version of Windows can only be installed on one computer. In addition, I do not think there is such a version as a student version of Windows XP Professional. I could be wrong but I think the student version of Windows XP is strictly Windows XP.

That being said, since you did buy a retail version of Windows XP Professional, that is the version that should be on this computer. If installing it is giving you problems, that would be where our attentions should lie.

As I mentioned, the Windows CD does all the grunt work on the front end so no boot and nuke process is necessary. Above everything else, my belief is that, as it stands now, you are running a computer with an illegal installation of Windows.

Eh, kind of...maybe...maybe not. I agree that strictly speaking the retail version of XP Pro should be the one to make it truly "legal", but I would argue it is merely a technicality. The original poster made every attempt to be legal. And to some degree, you contradicted yourself a little bit. If there is no such thing as an educational XP Pro (i.e. no functional difference), then the only thing technically wrong is that the original poster should use the "student" version to install but then activate with the retail COA.

Point is that I nominally consider it legal. The original poster gave Micro$oft its pound of flesh for the retail copy...as long as the retail copy is not installed on another machine, then I would argue that he/she is nominally legal.

Now, it is weird that the "student" version will install but the retail version will not...unless the install disk is damaged/defective. The poster could try using the "student" install disk but activate with the retail license COA/license code.

[smax013]

skicrazer said:

My initial theory: The fact that this issue only occurs when using various browsers, coupled with the fact that streaming video is choppy, leads me to believe that this is definitely a lack of resources issue.


As far as my internet connection, it's now AT&T DSL, 1.5MB down, 384KB up, confirmed pretty closely via cnet and PCPitstop speed tests. I really don't think it's the ISP, as the browser task bar shows "Done" but the page hasn't been presented yet, and the task manager tray icon is full-green indicating 100% CPU utilization. Also, video is choppy even when the download bar is far ahead of the playback indicator, though it is fine when a local file is played back on Win Media Player.

I would tend to agree...that it is either lack of resources or some sort of local issue. The fact that pages seems to download then the CPU/computer needs to "chug" away at it tends to suggest that it is NOT a ISP/Internet connection issue.

The real question is why or what is causing it. I don't remember if you ever answered my question of if the hard drive is also "chugging" away when this happens.