afom.exe, Memory Fox, FF22 Ram Leak and WSA

Have been having ludicrous issues with FF22 RAM use.. sludging my PC.
Possibly me , but cruising around the other night: FF Ram use >1.5G !! Lots of tabs open... but still

Sadly FF has been giving me some grief lately.

Tried an addon called Memory Fox
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/memory-fox/

Only works with WSA turned off

Saw this:
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=321111&highlight=afom

Put afom.exe in Allowed ijn Quarantine.
Appears as Allowed in Active processes.

Memory Fox still only works with WSA disabled.

Cant quite figure out what last post there is about. ?
Any updates ??

PS:
I know some of the supposed memory apps may not do much, but interesed in giving it a try as have done all the usual advices and there is positive user response.

 

I think this is unfortunately just Firefox. I use it myself and have run into the same massive memory use on a PC without WSA installed. MemoryFox is fundamentally incompatible with WSA as it needs to access all of your browser's memory (which would include all of your passwords/decrypted HTTPS data/etc.) and the Identity Shield blocks it. Adding an exception would be too risky in our eyes so we're just leaving it incompatible for security reasons.

 

Firefox loves to eat memory.

Mine is at 1.18GB as we speak.

Copied the profile to another system that doesn't run WSA to duplicate the tab load and addons.

1.36GB on startup.

Thank goodness for 32GB of RAM.

 

Ehhhh OK, but I got 512MB actually

 

You may want to just go out and get 2GB of RAM. A quick Google search shows the current price is $20 or so, and I'm sure it would save more than $20 of your time in increased speed and responsiveness to have more headroom available.

 

Why can't all programs use this much memory.

TH

 

Yeah I know it's cheap these days...I actually thought about including the reason as to why it is as it is but...I didn't so i'll explain.

Eveything in the PC in 9+ years old, HDD, RAM, Graph, CPU, and I am basically waiting on it to say that it had enough of me , so putting in anything new even RAM that's so cheap is pointless in my eyes and that is the reason why I haven't done so. It runs ESET and Webroot (last time I tried in 2012) just fine so I am happy. It was more of an envy joke to Techfox

But you're right about the Time savings, if I would get paid for all the waiting time I would be a billionaire by now

 

I'll just restart the browser when Flash has eaten up all the RAM (5 min on youtube then it's over), ESET may use more RAM than WSA, 90MB to be exact, but that doesn't mean it's heavy on the system quite the opposite, WSA and ESET is equal on system performance on my PC since they're well designed and well coded programs. They are the only two AVs that I can run if I want to be able to do things as well.

Other AV's just increase the waiting time

 

Sorry I have to disagree have a look at the thread at the Webroot Community about PassMark Tests in April: http://community.webroot.com/t5/Sec...e-s-latest-test-April-26-2013/m-p/38092#M1572

TH

 

I say the same about this test, as you and me say about the protection tests, it's a Test.

And this test doesn't know how the system feels and responds when I got WSA or ESET installed But you can agree with the test if you want to

 

Fair enough test is a test.

TH

 

You know what......I Agree!

 

OK Thanks.
Dont really want to drop WSA.
I dont think WSA is contributing to RAM use orgy I am seeing.
I've been beavering away with Process Explorer, and reviewing startups and services etc to try and reclaim some RAM, but it's FF gorging itself, and, of course worse with active media pages and flash.

Thanks for the comments everyone.

I still running XP on 32bit system so have relatively limited access to RAM.
The FF memory usage is really getting up my nares lately.

FF has been a good tool for years, but, I am having to significantly adjust my usual patterns ( Linux VM running alongside primary OS ) to fit in with FF.

I have tried all the specified settings and changes as per Mozilla and elsewhere: not really any difference.

Heard the usual: AdBlock, leaky Flash, bad add-ons, bad plug-ins, leaky Javascript etc etc.
Not a lot of 'official' response from Mozilla yet as to what seems to be an increasing issue.

Hhmm: >thinks< time for Chrome trial ??
Maybe even aaaccchhh IE

Suppose I'll have to upgrade HW soon, just dont feel like tossing perfectly good HW yet.

Not all players have i7 cores, 64bit systems and 32G Ram to play with. !

Regards.

PS: while I'm here: any suggestions/experience with other browser options to curtail the RAM fest ??

 

Perfectly Good Hardware is more complicated than "it runs". If you doubt this, try being a sysadmin where your management thinks the server built in 1998 running NT4.0 is still "perfectly good hardware" and don't want to replace it.

(And no, I don't have an i7. That would be a waste of money. Much better Performance per Dollar on an AMD FX 8150. At the time it was acquired, a similar Intel chip cost $500, while the AMD cost $170. ^.^ Heck, I have a cheesy laptop with a dual-core 1.4GHz processor, 3GB RAM, Windows 7... $300. )

Lessee... Firefox on XP 512MB RAM...
Set history retention low (These days means clear Places history at shutdown)
No more than three tabs
Manual cache control to 50MB at most
Restart the browser often

Otherwise, Firefox is known for consuming RAM like a fox eating donuts.