Abstrak: Penjadwalan proses bertujuan mengoptimalkan penggunaan CPU, menekan waktu tunggu, dan meningkatkan kinerja sistem, namun peningkatan jumlah serta kompleksitas proses menyulitkan pemeliharaan performa pada beban kerja dinamis, yang tidak selalu dapat diatasi oleh semua algoritma penjadwalan. Penelitian ini membandingkan tiga algoritma penjadwalan Multi-Level Queue, Round Robin, dan Priority Scheduling melalui simulasi dengan tiga skenario pengujian. Kebaruan penelitian terletak pada analisis komparatif kinerja ketiga algoritma berdasarkan karakteristik beban kerja berbeda, sehingga memberikan gambaran adaptivitas algoritma penjadwalan dalam kondisi sistem dinamis. Evaluasi dilakukan berdasarkan turnaround time, waiting time, response time, dan throughput pada tiga skenario. Pada beban kerja seimbang, Priority Scheduling unggul dalam TAT dan WT namun Round Robin terbaik untuk Response Time. Pada beban kerja berat, Priority Scheduling sangat efisien dengan TAT 17.6 ms. Pada beban kerja ringan dengan variasi prioritas, Priority Scheduling memberikan kinerja terbaik untuk TAT 6.6 ms dan WT 4.0 ms, namun Round Robin unggul dalam Response Time 2.0 ms. Hasil menunjukkan Priority Scheduling paling efisien dengan turnaround time 21% dan waiting time 29% lebih baik dari Round Robin, serta lebih unggul 13% dan 17% dibanding Multi-Level Queue. Priority Scheduling dapat mengeksekusi proses berprioritas tinggi terlebih dahulu tanpa overhead context switching. Round Robin unggul dalam response time, sedangkan Multi-Level Queue menunjukkan kinerja seimbang.Kata kunci: Algoritma Penjadwalan CPU, Multi-Level Queue, Round Robin, Priority Scheduling, SimulasiAbstract: Process scheduling aims to maximize CPU utilization, reduce waiting time, and improve system performance under dynamic workloads, where not all algorithms adapt effectively. This study compares Multi-Level Queue, Round Robin, and Priority Scheduling using simulation across three workload scenarios. The novelty lies in a comparative performance analysis based on different workload characteristics, highlighting algorithm adaptability under dynamic conditions. Performance is evaluated using turnaround time, waiting time, response time, and throughput.Under balanced workloads, Priority Scheduling achieves better turnaround time and waiting time, while Round Robin provides the best response time. In heavy workloads, Priority Scheduling shows high efficiency with a turnaround time of 17.6 ms. Under light workloads with priority variation, Priority Scheduling performs best with a turnaround time of 6.6 ms and a waiting time of 4.0 ms, whereas Round Robin excels in response time at 2.0 ms. Overall, Priority Scheduling is the most efficient algorithm, achieving 21% better turnaround time and 29% better waiting time than Round Robin, and outperforming Multi-Level Queue by 13% and 17%, respectively. Round Robin offers the best response time, while Multi-Level Queue demonstrates balanced performance.Keywords: CPU Scheduling Algorithm, Multi-Level Queue, Round Robin, Priority Scheduling, Simulation
Copyrights © 2026