How does Malwarebytes 3.0 (with real time protection enabled) impact your PC's performance ?

  • A lot, i had to uninstall it.

    Votes: 48 50.0%
  • A lot, i disabled some features.

    Votes: 8 8.3%
  • It has some impact but it's acceptable.

    Votes: 29 30.2%
  • No problem here, it's light as a feather !

    Votes: 11 11.5%

  • Total voters
    96
R

RoadRashWolfenstein

Guest
#1
Bellow you will find my experience using the product. I made a poll because i thought it would be interesting to know how Malwarebytes impact users performance.

So i have Malwarebytes 3.0 installed on 3 PC, and it slows down the computers A LOT (when using Chrome or even seeing pictures in a folder). I also have Norton Security and SUPERAntiSpyware (real time protection disabled), but i have made the exclusions for all 3 softwares.

I have tried to uninstall Norton and SAS but it didn't change nothing. Malwarebytes uses A LOT of CPU when starting Chrome or opening a new tab (up to 30 or 40% for 10 or 20 seconds) and between 200 to 300mb of RAM constantly. If i uninstall Malwarebytes the computer becomes light again and works smoothly.

I have realized how ridiculous is the CPU usage when checking the system monitoring of Diskeeper. On the last 7 days Malwarebytes has used almost 45% of the CPU :eek: That is almost half of the total raw power of the PC. In comparison, Chrome has used only less than 5% and it used for hours every day. Norton uses so little power that it doesn't even appear on the list. It also uses the most disk usage. It is more or less the same thing on the 2 other computers.

The specs of my PCs also very decent (i5, 8gb RAM, SSD) and the other computer is even a gaming rig. They are on Windows 10 (clean install).

Therefore in the meantime i think i'll have to disable the real time protection features and just let the daily scan :( I hope Malwarebytes will fix this issue and make it lighter, as it seems i'm not the only one having this issue, and their product is really awesome besides that.

Here are some screenshots of the CPU and disk usage (system monitoring in Diskeeper):

CPU USAGE THE LAST 7 DAYS:
Malwarebytes CPU usage.JPG


DISK USAGE THE LAST 7 DAYS:
Malwarebytes disk usage.JPG
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Evjl's Rain

Level 38
Content Creator
AV-Tester
Verified
Joined
Apr 18, 2016
Messages
2,797
Operating System
Windows 8.1
Antivirus
Avast
#2
MB3 is just very bad. Poor detection rate, high resource usage and almost has no zero-day malware protection. according to some tests, it blocked malwares by the scanner, the rest was executed but it was completely silent

MB3 only has good a web blocker, thanks to their hphosts, good antiexploit module, great signature against PUPs, adwares which are usually missed by primary AVs
the antiransomware and antimalware/antivirus features are absolute jokes

if you follow the thread on Wilders, many many users are complaining about it and more people revert back to v2.2
 
Last edited:

novocaine

Level 4
Verified
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Messages
176
Operating System
Windows 7
Antivirus
Kaspersky
#3
last week I tried MB3 then it shows around 200MB on TM, ok uninstall, I tried to put 2nd layer aside my ESET SS 8, I also tried to put HMPA and my connection slowed down, my world of warcraft became a mess, ok uninstall, no 2nd layer, no threats found anyway
 

Svoll

Level 12
Verified
Joined
Nov 17, 2016
Messages
554
Operating System
MacOS High Sierra
Antivirus
Norton
#4
Voted has some impact but it is acceptable.

When I ran the 30 day trial, I didn't notice too much of an impact, it just felt not as refined as version 2.2. I went back to version 2.2 after testing it due to it consuming about 350-400mb of ram. There are videos about MB 3.0 posted on the the video reviews and it has performed well. Video Review - Malwarebytes Premium V3 Review
I agree with the reviewer, if your computer can afford the resources to run it, it is pretty amazing for a new release.
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2016
Messages
239
#7
I uninstalled MB months ago because of poor detection tests. It was basically useless against malware.

I have no desire to install a buggy MB3. By all reports it's garbage. Detection is still very poor.

MB really need to raise their game. They have fallen so far behind the composition I doubt they can recover.
 

Evjl's Rain

Level 38
Content Creator
AV-Tester
Verified
Joined
Apr 18, 2016
Messages
2,797
Operating System
Windows 8.1
Antivirus
Avast
#12
Voted has some impact but it is acceptable.

When I ran the 30 day trial, I didn't notice too much of an impact, it just felt not as refined as version 2.2. I went back to version 2.2 after testing it due to it consuming about 350-400mb of ram. There are videos about MB 3.0 posted on the the video reviews and it has performed well. Video Review - Malwarebytes Premium V3 Review
I agree with the reviewer, if your computer can afford the resources to run it, it is pretty amazing for a new release.
I agree to some extend. However, it's not worth to spend that much resource for that limited level of protection
there are many better products with much lighter resource usage
 
R

RoadRashWolfenstein

Guest
#13
Thanks a lot @Evjl's Rain @novocaine @Svoll @beetal2015 @Vasudev @Zero Knowledge @askmark @Petrovic @carsten ibsen and @TheJokerz and all of you that participated to the poll ;)

I'm glad to know i'm not the only one having this issue. For those that don't have slow down issues, well i'm happy for guys. Maybe you have a powerful rig or it's just luck ?

Anyway it seems that version 3.0 won't give me a break. I've tried deactivating the real time protection, but even with pop-up notifications turned off, Malwarebytes still warns me that some protection are deactivated and propose to turn them on upon startup. I can just close the pop-up, but still it's annoying not being able to use the Premium version to just use the scheduled scans without having these warnings. They definitely forget the power users on that one...

In a post on the Malwarebytes forum, an administrator said "In addition to the above info, please be aware that certain notifications cannot be disabled, even when that setting is turned off" (see last post here).

I guess i'll have to deal with the pop-ups or just uninstall Malwarebytes. It's too bad cause i bought a 2 years license just a few months ago, and i can't help thinking HPA would have been a much lighter alternative, even though I've seen there is a few bugs now and there.

I doubt there can be any sort of update that could make MBAM 3.0 light, but an option to turn off real time protection pop-ups warning would be nice.

PS: I've quoted all of you guys in my message. Is this OK, or should i just have replied without doing that ? o_O
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Messages
53
#20
I'm still using MBAM 2.2.1.1043 and looks like I'm not going to update until they fix those issues. :)
Same here... I'll give Malwarebytes a chance to get up to speed before trying ver 3.0... Has Malwarebytes shot themselves in the head by attempting to be more than they used to be?

(And MBAM was really, really good in its ver 1.x and 2.x incarnations... here's hoping they get it right. ;))