I've made some tests about RAM usage of our browser in comparison with other competitors.
I've taken for test stable Big Four (excluding 'ChromeOpera' which I never used), some Chrome clones (both 'enhanced' and 'light'), development builds, popular oldtimers like Presto Opera in latest user assemblies and other 'low-RAM eaters' like QtWeb, Slimboat Qupzilla and - the main part - newest KM75 beta 2 and last old KM - 1.7a2.
Test was made on i5Core Intel system under Win7 x64 with 16Gb RAM.
Testing kit of pages consisted of 5 comparatively modern media (news, TV, websearch etc.) russian sites. Links are here (but you'd better create your own test-kit, if decide to repeat this):
http://lenta.ru/news/2015/01/29/radionova/
http://www.allsportinfo.ru/index.php?id=89418
http://rsport.ru/photo/20150129/802843619.html
http://www.ntv.ru/sport/1296416/
http://news.yandex.ru/yandsearch?cl4url=lenta.ru/news/2015/01/29/radionova/&lang=ru&lr=2
Then all browsers were tested for basic compatibility with modern web technologies on 3 sites and rated by myself in whole on a 10-point scale.
Results are here in table and diagrams (all clickable).
RAM was measured in kbytes.
Main table
RAM usage graph
Compatibility graph
Conclusion:
K-Meleon nowadays remains the most RAM saving browser among actual and compatible ones.
It's RAM consumption is comparable only with some old-Webkit-based browsers like
QtWeb and
Slimboat which both have obvious incompatibilities with some modern websites.
But in terms of new techs support KM is not cutting edge but completely able browser.
And old KM is really unique in terms of RAM frugality remaining compatible with the essential part of web except for most modern sites.