X
Tap here to go to the mobile version of the site.

Support Forum

Plugin-container.exe ate my CPU and my goldfish

Posted

After installing Firefox 3.6.4 and version 3.6.6 respectively, there was a process running in the background, called plugin-container.exe. It immediately began to eat my CPU, my RAM and my goldfish. I have a fish tank in my room and after installing the FF update, my goldfish disappeared. Can I get a new goldfish from Mozilla?

This happened

Not sure how often

== after installing v3.6.4 and higher

After installing Firefox 3.6.4 and version 3.6.6 respectively, there was a process running in the background, called plugin-container.exe. It immediately began to eat my CPU, my RAM and my goldfish. I have a fish tank in my room and after installing the FF update, my goldfish disappeared. Can I get a new goldfish from Mozilla? == This happened == Not sure how often == after installing v3.6.4 and higher

Additional System Details

Installed Plug-ins

  • -np-mswmp
  • RealPlayer(tm) LiveConnect-Enabled Plug-In
  • 6.0.12.448
  • NPRuntime Script Plug-in Library for Java(TM) Deploy
  • Foxit Reader Plug-In For Firefox and Netscape
  • The QuickTime Plugin allows you to view a wide variety of multimedia content in Web pages. For more information, visit the QuickTime Web site.
  • Default Plug-in
  • Shockwave Flash 10.1 r53
  • Adobe Shockwave for Director Netscape plug-in, version 11.5
  • Version 1.1.0, copyright 1996-2010 The VideoLAN Teamhttp://www.videolan.org/
  • Next Generation Java Plug-in 1.6.0_20 for Mozilla browsers
  • Npdsplay dll
  • DRM Store Netscape Plugin
  • DRM Netscape Network Object

Application

  • User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.6) Gecko/20100625 Firefox/3.6.6

More Information

george.kearse 0 solutions 25 answers

the-edmeister

Do you really believe Ask a new question will get you support when THIS question remains unsuppported and unanswered?????

Sure we're all grateful for the questions that are supported and answered but why oh why are so many left unsupported and unanswered?????

This problem with Plugin-container.exe hasn't gone away. It still exists today!

the-edmeister Do you really believe '''Ask a new question''' will get you support when THIS question remains unsuppported and unanswered????? Sure we're all grateful for the questions that are supported and answered but why oh why are so many left unsupported and unanswered????? This problem with Plugin-container.exe hasn't gone away. It still exists today!

Modified by george.kearse

Morbus 135 solutions 2340 answers

Please refrain from using so many question marks together.

The rules are the rules. You have a different problem, use a different thread.

Thirdly, the plugin-container.exe will not go away any time soon, nor is it a problem. The problem is with your plugins that you have installed probably without knowing, or with your (maybe outdated) flash. I don't know. Follow the instructions already given and if they don't work, say so. MAYBE someone will help you. If you're rude, you're definitely not gonna get any help, that's for sure. Not any more help that what has already been given, at any rate.

Please refrain from using so many question marks together. The rules are the rules. You have a different problem, use a different thread. Thirdly, the plugin-container.exe will not go away any time soon, nor is it a problem. The problem is with your plugins that you have installed probably without knowing, or with your (maybe outdated) flash. I don't know. Follow the instructions already given and if they don't work, say so. MAYBE someone will help you. If you're rude, you're definitely not gonna get any help, that's for sure. Not any more help that what has already been given, at any rate.
MeeAgain 0 solutions 1 answers

(XP SP3) Some very basic testing turned up this:

http://fantasy.premierleague.com/my-team/

i used the above website because i noticed i had it open when my plugin-thingy was bouncing around 10% and had been for an hour.

it seems that having it as the active tab will mean i get 10% cpu. having the site open as the active tab but minimising the browser is still 10%. having the site as the active tab but not the active window is still 10% switching to another tab drops it down to 0-2%.

so i tested it against other browsers i have.

Chrome does similar but i get 2x chrome.exe one at 7% and another at 3%. the site as the active tab but Chrome not the active window has 2x Chrome.exe 7% & 3% switching to another tab drops it to 0-2%. same same. but minimise Chrome and it drops to 0-2%.

with IE8 the site makes the process bounce around 10-20% with an estimated average of about 14%. however if i minimise it, make something else the active window or switch to another tab it drops to 0-2%.

People will notice plugin-thingy because its a stand out process (different, longer name – I did), it could function better by dropping to 0-2% when minimised like IE and Chrome, and there's a chance to be the best performing if it follows IE’s lead when not active, but essentially from what I saw its not really any worse than the others.

(XP SP3) Some very basic testing turned up this: http://fantasy.premierleague.com/my-team/ i used the above website because i noticed i had it open when my plugin-thingy was bouncing around 10% and had been for an hour. it seems that having it as the active tab will mean i get 10% cpu. having the site open as the active tab but minimising the browser is still 10%. having the site as the active tab but not the active window is still 10% switching to another tab drops it down to 0-2%. so i tested it against other browsers i have. Chrome does similar but i get 2x chrome.exe one at 7% and another at 3%. the site as the active tab but Chrome not the active window has 2x Chrome.exe 7% & 3% switching to another tab drops it to 0-2%. same same. but minimise Chrome and it drops to 0-2%. with IE8 the site makes the process bounce around 10-20% with an estimated average of about 14%. however if i minimise it, make something else the active window or switch to another tab it drops to 0-2%. People will notice plugin-thingy because its a stand out process (different, longer name – I did), it could function better by dropping to 0-2% when minimised like IE and Chrome, and there's a chance to be the best performing if it follows IE’s lead when not active, but essentially from what I saw its not really any worse than the others.
DeeterGroup 0 solutions 1 answers

I just moved my company back to using IE9, so what about CSS not looking perfect, at least the PCs work, and don't grind to a halt because of some stupid little process.

I just moved my company back to using IE9, so what about CSS not looking perfect, at least the PCs work, and don't grind to a halt because of some stupid little process.
Revarn 0 solutions 1 answers

This is really getting on my nerves now - comparatively to other Browsers now Firefox is eatin most of my CPU

I like the interface thats why I stick to it but the difference is fading and I am tempted to shift to other browser options

I hope they fix this shitty snag soon

This is really getting on my nerves now - comparatively to other Browsers now Firefox is eatin most of my CPU I like the interface thats why I stick to it but the difference is fading and I am tempted to shift to other browser options I hope they fix this shitty snag soon
Morbus 135 solutions 2340 answers

"They" aren't going to fix it because it's not a problem that's fixable from their side (unless you're talking about the animated gif problem, in which case it's inbound for Firefox 10...). Please read the suggestions given previously in the thread and reply accordingly.

"They" aren't going to fix it because it's not a problem that's fixable from their side (unless you're talking about the animated gif problem, in which case it's inbound for Firefox 10...). Please read the suggestions given previously in the thread and reply accordingly.

Modified by Morbus

NedMartin 0 solutions 3 answers

This is a Firefox problem (at least in my case), and is caused by Flash. However, using any other browser - with the same version of Flash, does not have this problem.

And as others have said, this - along with its excessive memory usage - does make Firefox, an otherwise good browser, worse than its competition.

This ''is'' a Firefox problem (at least in my case), and is caused by Flash. However, using any other browser - with the same version of Flash, does not have this problem. And as others have said, this - along with its excessive memory usage - does make Firefox, an otherwise good browser, worse than its competition.