So I had a moment to run 0.9.3.0, and it used up ~4.1Gb on my Win-8 box, while 0.9.2.0 used up 4.25Gb, which contrasts with your findings. This was not strictly 0.9.2.0 in my case, it was the light-node version running in archive mode (full node). I don't think small differences can be taken as representation of anything much, since these look to vary along with the network conditions, transaction pool, etc.

Perhaps keep an eye on memory usage and see if it settles at some lower amount eventually?

I'm back on testing with just the light-node though, seeing as that is the 1st major release on the horizon (and just 2.6Gb of memory usage is also neat)    Thank you everyone for the feedback btw!