P3D running but CPU not running at max speed

[SteveW 1,792]

Right, that means it's not dependant on the user account gaining access so continues to point to a first session error that results in second session clear. The systems depend on a lot of factors relating to security and access privilege from a system account. If it is not caused by alleviating a hardware error from say the second process moving onto a slower core, then the problem indicates a possible permissions error and could be related to installing some older software relating to DX that does not behave in later versions of Windows.

Edited December 29, 2018 by SteveW

[Ray Proudfoot 8,963]

@SteveW, it realised a mystery. I run dxdiag a few seconds after the first attempt fails. It always works. It’s like a switch is incorrectly set after boot up and is somehow cleared after the first run fails.

I have been expecting Microsoft to ask me to check registry values but it hasn’t materialised.

The only software I have installed is the GoFlight stuff to program the buttons and switches. But if it was that surely a lot more people would be affected. The CH and Saitek hardware use default drivers.

[SteveW 1,792]

Yes, it is an odd one. My only worry is that to re-do Windows on that PC only after v5 comes out might be a mistake instead of doing it now.

[SteveW 1,792]

...Remember I said, when you started talking about leaving it with the error, that 'it is faulty'. You didn't care for the remark, which I felt was an odd reaction, perhaps misplaced defence of your brand new kit which I can understand. However I feel that any PC delivered, certainly if I delivered it, that can't run the first invocation of DX could be said to be unsatisfactory quality.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,963]

Steve,

I have logged this problem with Chillblast just in case I need to make a claim under the warranty. The problem is they would need all my kit attached to replicate the problem. I suppose a TeamViewer session might help but I'll wait for a response from Microsoft first.

It won't have the error when returned to Chillblast so all they'll do is suggest a wipe of the C drive and reinstall Windows. I can do that myself and if the problem still exists after that then I can contact them.

[SteveW 1,792]

Do Chillblast know if the motherboard and chipset have more recent files? It's very possible that there's a simple problem in there with newer kit can be resolved with an update.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,963]

58 minutes ago, SteveW said:

Do Chillblast know if the motherboard and chipset have more recent files? It's very possible that there's a simple problem in there with newer kit can be resolved with an update.

I’ll speak to them after New Year.

[Dirk98 354]

Microsoft would come second-third+ after Chillblast to ask if I were Ray. Let them Chillblast know it's Christmas and you're still meddling with this little insect.

Edited December 30, 2018 by Dirk98

[Ray Proudfoot 8,963]

1 hour ago, Dirk98 said:

Microsoft would come second-third+ after Chillblast to ask if I were Ray. Let them Chillblast know it's Christmas and you're still meddling with this little insect.

Chillblast are a small company. I imagine they’re closed until 2 Jan. Anyway, it’s Microsoft’s software. Shouldn’t they be the experts?

I’d like to check what version of dxdiag.exe others are running. Can you post your version number please.

[onebob 125]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Can you post your version number please.

 DxDiag Version: 10.00.17763.0001 64bit Unicode
 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,963]

27 minutes ago, onebob said:

 DxDiag Version: 10.00.17763.0001 64bit Unicode
 

Thanks. I’ll check my version tomorrow and report back.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,963]

On 12/30/2018 at 8:24 PM, onebob said:

 DxDiag Version: 10.00.17763.0001 64bit Unicode

Confirmed I'm running the same version.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,963]

I know it's a bit of a long shot but in Event Viewer I have 3 errors related to DistributedCOM. Microsoft in other similar error reports says not to worry about these as repairing them could cause more damage that ignoring them. That seems a very unprofessional approach. Why ignore something the OS is not happy with? I have no such problems with a Windows 7 PC suggesting 10 still contains bugs.

This is one of three reports. They all appear to be similar. Event ID is 10016.

The application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Launch permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
Windows.SecurityCenter.SecurityAppBroker and APPID Unavailable  to the user NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM SID (S-1-5-18) from address LocalHost (Using LRPC) running in the application container Unavailable SID (Unavailable). This security permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative tool.

I haven't a clue what that means. Why can't they write things in plain English?

[SteveW 1,792]

Ignore it, nothing you can do. However it's not telling anyone that Windows has bugs, it's telling you that it's secure.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,963]

26 minutes ago, SteveW said:

Ignore it, nothing you can do. However it's not telling anyone that Windows has bugs, it's telling you that it's secure.

Okay, ta.