Resource hog.

[luckyvic]

See attached, at bootup, then IE page, after IE exit.

[luckyvic]

see attached

[luckyvic]

After a couple hours, mem usage goes higher, pc sloows down, have to reboot. Very frustrating.

[iyogisolutions1]

I recommend you to remove the ZoneAlarm and IO bit

[igor]

Your PC would hardly slow down because of 50MB of mem usage; that's not the culprint.

[CraigB]

I recommend you to remove the ZoneAlarm and IO bit

Agreed, remove-reboot-retest 

[DavidR]

@ luckyvic
I would also suggest that you look at the VM Size as avast team members believe it gives a more accurate indication of memory usage. But there are times when that will be higher, though in the bigger scheme of things compare avast against other processes and it is far from a resource hog.

Don't forget, memory is there to be used and it is windows that controls memory usage and when to release it.

You should also order the list by clicking on the Image Name column heading (and then use the scroll to place it at the top), this will allow you to crop the image showing only that which is necessary. This keeps image size down allowing you to post all three images in one post, see example image

[luckyvic]

 Thanks David for the helpful info. As removing ZoneAlarm and IObit, I've been using them with Avast! just fine until recently, about week ago this high usage started. So no I will not remove them.

Most recent,

[DavidR]

You're welcome as in your case the VM Size is much better looking and honestly even it were higher, as Igor said that kind of RAM figure really shouldn't have any impact on overall performance of your system.

So as he said if it is slow then there is something else in the equation, not just RAM, with 2GB of RAM even 82MB of RAM is a drop in the ocean.

I would be looking at removing IObit software nothing to do with conflict but more to do with the reputation/history/ethics of the company. That said there is a direct link if, you are managing RAM using IObit SmartRam and with XP and 2GB of RAM this is something that you don't need. There is an overhead with using RAM managers as the RAM will have to be reloaded if what was previously in RAM is no longer present, that is why I feel it is better to let windows manage RAM.

I would also question the need for Smart Defrag, which presumably this is an in the background defrag function. Your system shouldn't get so defragged that it needs to be constantly kept defragged. I find it preferably to do it weekly with Puran Defrag and even then my C:\ drive doesn't need it every week, I could leave it for a month and not suffer any lag due to fragmentation.