Haha, make it lag all the graphics. And Laz, you better share some of those bitcoins

 

Haha we'll see what Laz says tomorrow. I doubt it's actually bitcoin mining though

Yeah, I hope not. I'd really hate to lose even more faith in this bot. - Eric get on IRC

Edited June 24, 201411 yr by dreamliner

So whatever this GPU hog is, it seemed to be implemented around 2.1.10 release, I've checked OS1 1.8.9 and was running this:

 

Also, had a consistent pattern until I hit 2.1.10, then:

 

 

Something funky is happening here.

Edited June 24, 201411 yr by NotoriousPP

So whatever this GPU hog is, it seemed to be implemented around 2.1.10 release, I've checked OS1 1.8.9 and was running this:

 

Also, had a consistent pattern until I hit 2.1.10, then:

 

 

Something funky is happening here.

Dat workstation card

Lol call upon almighty Laz what is this sorcery

Also, the GPU still does some background work on windows. So 5% average GPU load is normal.

But 50% is insane. Either somethings borked or someone has some 'splainin' to do

Also, the GPU still does some background work on windows. So 5% average GPU load is normal.

But 50% is insane. Either somethings borked or someone has some 'splainin' to do

Lucyyy you got some splainin to dooo.

This is pathetic.... we don't mine bitcoins on your machines. We've setup OSBot to allow the JVM to optimize graphic performance. The JVM automatically chooses whether or not your GPU is used or not. If your GPU is used, it's sole purpose is to save CPU processing power. The only process within OSBot which makes use of the GPU is when we copy image buffers around to render the canvas and loading screen which you've screenshotted. OSBot requires double-buffering on every client and this may lead to your GPUs powering up. Double-buffering allows us to render graphics on-top of the RuneScape canvas in a synchronized fashion.

 

We could make way more money by simply making OSBot browse ads in the background or some other bullshit but we don't. I'm disappointed that the community has come to such a conclusion.... -.-

 

It's funny cause you're comparing GPU usage at the loading screen of OSBot 2 to the GPU usage of OSBot 1 on the loaded RS client. Obviously your profiling methods are not accurate anyways. 

This is pathetic.... we don't mine bitcoins on your machines. We've setup OSBot to allow the JVM to optimize graphic performance. The JVM automatically chooses whether or not your GPU is used or not. If your GPU is used, it's sole purpose is to save CPU processing power. The only process within OSBot which makes use of the GPU is when we copy image buffers around to render the canvas and loading screen which you've screenshotted. OSBot requires double-buffering on every client and this may lead to your GPUs powering up. Double-buffering allows us to render graphics on-top of the RuneScape canvas in a synchronized fashion.

 

We could make way more money by simply making OSBot browse ads in the background or some other bullshit but we don't. I'm disappointed that the community has come to such a conclusion.... -.-

 

It's funny cause you're comparing GPU usage at the loading screen of OSBot 2 to the GPU usage of OSBot 1 on the loaded RS client. Obviously your profiling methods are not accurate anyways.

Why do I sit at 50% gpu usage after the client has loaded?

150W of extra heat in my room doesn't feel too good.

Why do I sit at 50% gpu usage after the client has loaded?

150W of extra heat in my room doesn't feel too good.

 

It may simply be a mistake on our part. Maybe we're not deallocating the resources given to the GIF image and thus it's being rendered in the background. I have not been aware of the issue but I'll look into it. 

 

Also: http://osbot.org/forum/topic/52428-osbot-2111/ 2.1.11 was the revision under which the new startup loader was released. It seems the loader is the culprit. 

To help with debugging

 

dayum, that image is bigger than I thought.

 

Highest CPU usage I get is on this screen. Every other screen is lower.

Regardless of what the issue is, if you're going to start having OSBot use resources from other locations, it would be kind of you to let us know first.

Glad this has been partially resolved. Hope to see the GPU usage revised soon!

This is pathetic.... we don't mine bitcoins on your machines. We've setup OSBot to allow the JVM to optimize graphic performance. The JVM automatically chooses whether or not your GPU is used or not. If your GPU is used, it's sole purpose is to save CPU processing power. The only process within OSBot which makes use of the GPU is when we copy image buffers around to render the canvas and loading screen which you've screenshotted. OSBot requires double-buffering on every client and this may lead to your GPUs powering up. Double-buffering allows us to render graphics on-top of the RuneScape canvas in a synchronized fashion.

 

We could make way more money by simply making OSBot browse ads in the background or some other bullshit but we don't. I'm disappointed that the community has come to such a conclusion.... -.-

 

It's funny cause you're comparing GPU usage at the loading screen of OSBot 2 to the GPU usage of OSBot 1 on the loaded RS client. Obviously your profiling methods are not accurate anyways. 

 

Thanks for clearing it up. Perhaps in the future OSB 2 could have an option to render/double buffer using the CPU, GPU, or even balanced between both, allowing the user to choose. This would let the user put the majority of the strain on the processing unit that they see most fit. If users have a higher end CPU and lower end GPU, they could choose to use the CPU for rendering and double buffering, or vice versa. It could be a nice feature to give botters the control.

Haha, now available for free users to use two instances. Nice way to attrack leechers and mine cybermine on their computers. 

Haha, now available for free users to use two instances. Nice way to attrack leechers and mine cybermine on their computers. 

 

It's been already confirmed that no one is mining anything, and I have confirmed it via tests... Besides, everything @Laz said, made sense.