Jump to content


Honorary Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Francois_Blais

  1. Update:

    Nothing helped, unfortunately.

    I went further, disabled as much as I could, leaving a very minimal Windows, and MBAM real-time still uses much too CPU resources.

    That old PC is going to run Linux anyway in the next days.

    I'll try the next releases of MBAM when they come out, but for the moment this case is closed unresolved.

    When I get a newer machine, I'll see how it goes.

    Thanks for the help,


  2. Thanks for your feedback.

    I know I'm not alone with this problem.

    (IMHO, 1.46 was rushed out of the door too quickly, but that's another thing. I downloaded the beta, and the next day the beta was closed and 1.46 released)

    I understand there were more important issues to fix quickly for customers, so I guess there may be a 1.47 release in the not so far future... :)



  3. Thanks 1PW.

    FWIW, my problems are exposed in many threads on what you call "a more appropriate part of the forum".

    I don't know if you were here when some people (including me) had problems with 1.43 and its RAM usage after updates.

    *Maybe* I'm just experiencing a problem in 1.45, still present in 1.46beta.

    So, with all due respect, please let the people at Malwarebytes judge if my post here in as off-topic as you suggest.

    Best regards,


  4. Hi.

    Please read this message as an intro:


    Unfortunately, I get the same problem.

    Disabling the IP protection, and both heuristic options, didn't help at all.

    As reported by other people, it says 1.45 when I hover the mouse over the systray icon.

    Can someone at MalwareBytes provide me a link to the 1.44 release, please?

    I'll save the current rules.ref to use with it. (and disable updating)

    Just to confirm (or not) that this version was working well.

    Best regards,


  5. [snip]

    The above took place with MBAM v1.46 beta on an old Intel Mobo running a Coppermine P3-650 w/768MB of RAM. The OS is XP Pro SP3 x86-32bit. Right now, I'd say that MBAM has a reasonable footprint.


    What are you seeing under similar circumstances?

    Thanks a lot, 1PW.

    Yesterday night I registered for the beta test.

    I'll do a clean fresh install and let you know.

    My old PC is also a Coppermine motherboard, P3-1000 with 512MB or RAM.

    1.45 draws a lot of CPU time (near 100%) with about anything I do.

    Best regards,


  6. I agree with you about ShyWriter's signature but your "Old P3-1000 with 512MB RAM" is probably best using Windows 98SE not XP.

    FWIW, MBAM 1.44 real-time was running like a charm here, and it was only a few weeks ago.

    There's something wrong going with 1.45.

    Downgrading my system to 98SE appears as a ludicrous suggestion to me, with all due respect.

    MalwareBytes should *not* force program updates, IMHO.



  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies - We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.