# CPU Priority



## crazydad (Jul 4, 2001)

For Win 95\98 SE ME Only
****************************



Run Regedit and go to:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\VxD\BIOS

In the right hand pane create a new DWORD Value called "CPUPriority" (no quotes) -> double-click on it -> check the Decimal box -> type 1 -> click OK to save.
This will speed things up by using the fastest priority to the CPU when opening any program, and works on 99% of the PCs I've tried it on. This will give the foreground of your desktop priority over the background.

More To Follow
Enjoy The Ride

Crazydad..........


----------



## Steven715 (Oct 14, 1999)

Thanks For that Tip i will give that a try on a cupple of computers

Chears


----------



## Rokko Ralph (Apr 24, 2000)

So does it give 100% priority to the foreground program? If so, doesn't that pretty much disable multitasking? It seems to me that it would slow things down. I'll try it though.


----------



## buck52 (Mar 9, 2001)

howdy

I have seen this tweak on other forums using different settings...

this was one of the responses...



> IF this tweak is actually used by windows, you do not want to be setting the parameter to zero.
> This supposedly will give the foreground (active) app/game exclusive CPU cycles (real time priority).
> Since windows is a multitasking environment and many tasks and events are time sensitive, you don't want a program running in the foreground to have all the rights to the processor, because this may cause an application, or a windows process, running in the background to fall over.


buck


----------



## crazydad (Jul 4, 2001)

OK,

We take a program ,In this case cpu priority
which we found by dissasembling a program called
*********** and then finding its registry makeup
and in what root,and key it resides in and what the
default settigs were. So you see its been around for
awhile. At my tweak website and many others you
will find a policy that reads like this.

I promise never to list a tip,trick,or tweak
unless i have tested it myself for long period
of time and Iam convinced it is safe.

As long as you follow the tweaks directions
to the letter everything will work fine. And
remember that If I say for Win95/98 SE&ME
please dont try it on Win XP/NT or any others.

I hope this answers your Question......

crazydad...........

[Edited by crazydad on 08-04-2001 at 03:13 PM]


----------



## MacFromOK (Mar 19, 2001)

Hey crazydad,

Just curious, what happened to the 1% that it
didn't work on? Serious crash, or minor hiccups?

Programmers can set their programs to different
priorities. So I'm wondering if the program itself
already has a high priority, and you tweak the
registry to a high priority, would that do as Rokko
suggested and possibly eliminate multitasking? Or
should the two not conflict?


----------



## crazydad (Jul 4, 2001)

To my knowllege there has never been a one percent.
Where do you get your info from? I micosoft had a 1%
crash rate with windows they would be dancing in the street. and as far as mulitasking goes a cpu's resorces
are dependant on how many threads are running in the
background.

[Edited by crazydad on 08-05-2001 at 04:13 PM]


----------



## MacFromOK (Mar 19, 2001)

Well, I got 99% from your post...



> This will speed things up by using the fastest priority to the CPU when opening any program, and works on 99% of the PCs I've tried it on. This will give the foreground of your desktop priority over the background.


but I did the math to get 1% all by myself...


----------



## MacFromOK (Mar 19, 2001)

Well, I'm not sure why you edited your last post
instead of replying to my last one, but anyway...

I wasn't talking about "resources", this whole post
is about "priority". And if the priority gets high
enough, windows will not do anything else until that
program is finished. Here's a quote from the Borland
C++ Builder help file:
*
Warning:	Boosting the thread priority of a CPU
intensive operation may starve the other threads in the
application. Only apply priority boosts to threads that
spend most of their time waiting for external events.
*

I wasn't trying to attack your credibility, I was
just asking some questions about your suggestion.


----------

