5
I've used XCgal for over a year, except I'm the only one who adds images, so I can understand your position if you are having many people upload images and the like.
I've recently added a new subdomain with just the coppermine module which I intend using for a public gallery. My assumption based on your observations, is that the actual copermine script (which xcgal is based from) will be less of a load on the server because it would be the original developers code and have code tweaks.
I do know that xcgal has been at the 1.1RC status for the entire time I've had it and have not seen any further development in it. Whether that will change remains to be seen.
Maybe one solution you can try in the interim, is change your library settings from IM, to GD 2, or vice-versa. Maybe playing with the settings a bit for the module might stop the heavy server load, such as disabling intermediate pictures, or reducing the thumbnail size. Maybe it could be something as simple as reducing the amount of image are being displayed at once per page. Changing the final output quality might help ,and deleteing the original images might serve some purpose as well, although I can't confirm that, or any of the suggestions I offered for that matter. It's a case of trial and error and communicating with your host(s) to let them know you are working on a solution.
Hopfully with a little bit of tweaking you will be able to reduce the impact on your host server. Once my separate gallery installation goes public for the rest of the family and friends, I'm sure I will hear from the host if there is a problem. Maybe this is something you may need to consider in the end, to integrate a gally with XOOPS, or branch outside the box for that feature. It's never easy to decide.