jelrik Posted September 19, 2009 ID:129425 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Hello And Welkom i open this new topic for everybody. i Check the memory usage of Malwarebytes' and i was Shocked! almost 40MBNOW I WANT YOU ALL OTHER Forum members to post how much Memory usage Malwarebytes' Uses Only For FULL Version!!! With Real-Time Protection. just to check. and then of the Malwarebytes' Team Coud Improve thathThank You-----------------------------------------------------------------------------MY COMPUTER Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swagger Posted September 19, 2009 ID:129506 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Approx. 33MB for mbamservice.exe and 40MB for mbamgui.exe -- That's not bad for real-time protection in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falkra Posted September 19, 2009 ID:129559 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Hi, NOW I WANT YOU ALL OTHER (...)I don't think this is necessary.mbamservice : 30 Mb here (XP), loading fast and fine. Agreed, Swagger, this is not bad, and if we compare to some browsers, antivirus, firewalls and some security suites, it's even good.Now everything depends on how much memory you have. I have 4 Gb, and I really don't care. If you have more than 1Gb (for XP), usually you even don't need to look at memory, especially when it loads fast. If you experience slow downs, this may be related to the OS itself or other programs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaintree16 Posted September 19, 2009 ID:129657 Share Posted September 19, 2009 How do you tell how much memory (in terms of mb, etc...) a program is using?Edit: I think I just figured it out MBAM Pro loads pretty quickly for me, and it doesn't bog down my system I agree with Falkra also, I don't think it is necessary for us all to post, I was just posting because I am curious myself to see how much it uses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff screen317 Posted September 19, 2009 Staff ID:129662 Share Posted September 19, 2009 Around 30MB here too.1% isn't bad at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefox Posted September 20, 2009 ID:129776 Share Posted September 20, 2009 All three services together are 46MB..... that's OK by me.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile360 Posted September 20, 2009 ID:129815 Share Posted September 20, 2009 @jelrik: mdm (Machine Debug Manager) isn't part of MBAM. MBAMService.exe and MBAMgui.exe are the processes for the realtime protection component. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yardbird Posted September 20, 2009 ID:129849 Share Posted September 20, 2009 worth it to me also! In a Time & Age when Malware is Almost at its top !!!! Read it for your self:http://www.theregister.co.uk/security/spyware/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jelrik Posted September 20, 2009 Author ID:129928 Share Posted September 20, 2009 okay but i find a very alot for just and AntiMalware Program Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yardbird Posted September 20, 2009 ID:129933 Share Posted September 20, 2009 so are you still Shocked! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile360 Posted September 20, 2009 ID:129940 Share Posted September 20, 2009 okay but i find a very alot for just and AntiMalware Program Really? Have you tried Spyware Doctor or SpySweeper? How do they stack up against MBAM for resource usage? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaintree16 Posted September 20, 2009 ID:129979 Share Posted September 20, 2009 @ ExileI know your last post wasn't to me, but I just wanted to pipe in and say that at least for me, Spyware Doctor slowed down my system considerably. My system would crawl. I had to ask for a refund. Nothing like that at ALL for Malwarebytes I hardly notice it running in the background! All I need to see is the little red and white M in the taskbar Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falkra Posted September 20, 2009 ID:130028 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Memory amount is not really the factor, memory percentage is. On my computer, MBAM uses less memory than Thunderbid, Firefox, and explorer.exe, as long as you don't experience slow downs, no problem ; anyway, memory usage is not constant, and you didn't post your memory amount. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaintree16 Posted September 20, 2009 ID:130035 Share Posted September 20, 2009 @ FalkraWell said! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falkra Posted September 20, 2009 ID:130046 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Well, screen317 said it better using the words I should have used in my previous post. I think a lot of people are obsessed by memory usage, because they have enough knowledge to test programs and see how they work. This is good.The bad part is that knowledge can create problems, let's thiink about optimization, for example. Some people use memory/ram optimizers, to "defragment" ram, but the NT6 kernel handles (quite) correctly memory segments, and this is not really useful, it can even cause trouble. Some try to get the shortest HijackThis report, but this is only good-looking when you make a report : if you don't notice any significant difference while using the computer, it is (in my opinion) useless.When you take half an hour to fully optimize your computer, and it boots faster, let's say 2 seconds faster (which is good), you have to boot 1800 times to get back the time it took to optimize. Performance is not the point here : if you get something, it might be knowledge. I may be wrong and this is my conception - there are others, as legitimate as this one - of what is worth trying or not, and how I use time on a computer, but if there's no trouble or excessive memory usage (for example memory leaks that have to be fixed), I think there's nothing special to do, except upgrading hardware from time to time or look at the OS version itself.30, 40 Mb, I think this is okay, if I compare to other software and I think about the features I get. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
srtools1980y Posted September 20, 2009 ID:130052 Share Posted September 20, 2009 FalkraYour post #'s 13 & 15 are very informative. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaintree16 Posted September 20, 2009 ID:130053 Share Posted September 20, 2009 @ FalkraHe said it well too You're right, a lot of people do seem to be obsessed with memory usage.Thanks for explaining all that to me, it makes more sense now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falkra Posted September 20, 2009 ID:130056 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Thank for your posts, you're welcome. You're right, a lot of people do seem to be obsessed with memory usage.This is a logical evolution. Before windows 2000 and XP, the memory managers were not really good, or to be precise, not adapted any more to what people started to need, and how programs were changing. To compensate or fix the issues, a lot of programs appeared, like memory optimizers, registry fixers (norton utilities was one of the first home products to have one), and people started to fix things and optimize.At the moment, cleaning temp folders, "defragmenting" ram and some other operations made sense, but the OSes got updated and fixed a lot of things. OSes change faster than habits, and a lot of us remember times when we had to check memory usage, or when friends did and told them. Now, depending on hardware capabilities and memory amounts, this is not really necessary, but it can be fascinating, and watching memory usage isn't bad at all, but Windows itself handles it quite well, and when the programs are well written, they free memory when they don't need it.In the last changelog, i can read :# (FIXED) Drastically improved product load speed on slower machines.# (FIXED) Improved memory usage in scanner and protection module.That's enough for me : the developer team didn't forget slow machines users, and gave to all of us more performance (the database optimization also was great). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaintree16 Posted September 20, 2009 ID:130066 Share Posted September 20, 2009 @ FalkraYou are welcome too This is a logical evolution.... Thank you for explaining that to me too! Now it makes much more sense to me As for your comments about the changelog, I agree! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoKenny1 Posted September 20, 2009 ID:130143 Share Posted September 20, 2009 One of the best Bill Gates quotes 640K ought to be enough for anybody. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/bill_gates.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountaintree16 Posted September 20, 2009 ID:130154 Share Posted September 20, 2009 @YoKenny1 That's not even enough for Malwarebytes to update if I am not mistaken, hehe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now