On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 14:35:27 -0600, "Buffalo"
 wrote:
>"Dustin"  wrote in message 
>news:XnsA35CA4CF86DC9X238BHEUFHHI5RJ791@94.75.214.90...
>>
>[snip]
>>
>>Malwarebytes also chews up a good portion of ram due to a design flaw in
>>it's engine. A design flaw they've known about since I was hired on and
>>pointed it out to them, years ago! I complained about it to no end too. [g]
>>
>>I was trying to save Marcin alot of time and aggravation. He'll have to
>>implement those design changes at some point and years ago would have been
>>alot easier than now. The database has been culled several times now due to
>>this design issue; to reduce memory consumption.
>[snip]
>
>
>Just checked my Pro MBAM (ver: 1.75.0.1300) the memory usage on my Win7 HE 
>64 bit system running in real time, not doing a scan, and it is aprox 370MB 
>of ram. WoW!  WOW!!
>mbamgui.exe *32 = 11.MB
>mbamservice.exe *32 = 254MB
>mbamscheduler.exe *32 = 107MB


I use Win7HP64SP1 and MBAM Pro (ver. 1.75.0.1300) real-time.
mbamgui.exe *32 = 3.572 K
mbamscheduelr.exe *32 = 4.020 K
mbamservice.exe *32 = 63.840 K

when I start the scanner and do nothing:
mbam.exe *32 = 130.844 K

Maybe the memory usage increases over time?

Started a full scan,
mbam.exe *32 = 137.xxx - 162.xxx (peak) K



>Never realized how much it used just doing real time protection.
>While running a full scan with high priority:          Almost  600MB of ram.
>mbamgui.exe *32 = 11MB
>mbamservice.exe *32 = 254MB
>mbamseceduler.exe *32 = 107MB
>mbam.exe *32  = 227MB
-- 
Fred W. (NL)
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2