Malwarebytes 1.65 Released

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by Mops21, Sep 10, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mops21

    Mops21 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Posts:
    1,505
    Location:
    Germany
  2. Cimmerian

    Cimmerian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Posts:
    410
    Location:
    New Jersey
    Got it...thanks! :thumb:
     
  3. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
    thank you:thumb:
     
  4. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,829
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    Thanks for the heads up, Mops21!

    I hope they are right about this...
    And I hope they look at the same thing for XP. ;)
     
  5. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Downloaded free version.
     
  6. Syobon

    Syobon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Posts:
    469
    Any improvements in the real time ? Can I enable it without mbam sucking my machine resources right in the jugular?
     
  7. twl845

    twl845 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Posts:
    4,186
    Location:
    USA
  8. hayc59

    hayc59 Updates Team

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Posts:
    2,138
    Location:
    R.I.P. Roger(roddy32)
    Thank You!!
     
  9. Securon

    Securon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Posts:
    1,937
    Location:
    London On
    Good Evening ! Thanks for the Heads Up. Sincerely...Securon
     
  10. LoneWolf

    LoneWolf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,408
    Malwarebytes keeps getting better n better, thanks for the info on the update. :D
     
  11. zip

    zip Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Posts:
    359
    Location:
    Mars
    I wish for a 64bit version of Malwarebytes.:)
     
  12. Barthez

    Barthez Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Posts:
    112
    Location:
    Poland
    I think the most noticeable change this version brings to Vista/7 users is:
    Until now MBAM PRO IP protection database refresh on those systems was performed by one of Windows service hosts and results in high CPU usage. If they really were able to eliminate this problem it would mean a big step forward IMO.
     
  13. Techwiz

    Techwiz Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Posts:
    539
    Location:
    United States
    Update seems to have resolved the lag on both of my computers (Vista & Seven 64-bit). Awesome :)
     
  14. ComputerSaysNo

    ComputerSaysNo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2012
    Posts:
    1,428
    Got it and it's working good here.
     
  15. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    wonderful as usual. MB has become a benchmark to even test AV's....i.e if they have left anything behind.

    I run the scan once a week to see if the big boys have missed something...:)
     
  16. PJC

    PJC Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,959
    Location:
    Internet
    Just testing it.
    Thanks! :thumb:
     
  17. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Well, Pro ver. still sucking up 46MB of memory on my WIN 7 SP1 x64 installation. I don't call that an improvement.:thumbd:
     
  18. m0use0ver

    m0use0ver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2011
    Posts:
    81

    Would you rather they hide their true resource usage like a lot of applications do..would it actually speed up your machine if that figure was *lower* or did it slow your machine down when it was *higher* ?

    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=261691&page=2#post1599831

    Link QFT:thumb:
     
  19. cruelsister

    cruelsister Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Posts:
    977
    Location:
    Paris
    For me, mbamservice is using 103,428K. On the other hand Firefox is taking up 227,500K (18a1). But as neither one is utilizing my CPU to any discernible extent, qui cogitat?
     
  20. kjdemuth

    kjdemuth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Posts:
    2,960
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Mine has been running around 38K but haven't noticed any system lag or excessive CPU usage.
     
  21. The Seeker

    The Seeker Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,101
    Location:
    Adelaide
    How much RAM do you have to worry about 46MB being used?
     
  22. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    I have 8GB but that is not this issue. Well designed security software dynamically increases and decreases memory as needed.

    I guess WIN 7 users shouldn't complain though. On XP, MBAM routinely uses over 100MB.

    Best way to descript MBAM Pro is the "sledge hammer" approach.
     
  23. The Seeker

    The Seeker Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,101
    Location:
    Adelaide
    I fail to see why you're concerned about a security program using just under 0.6% of your RAM.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.