Author Topic: Best Anti-virus (Read 53620 times)

dantheman · « **on:** November 07, 2005, 07:43 AM »

AVG, AVAST...? Which free edition is less resource hog?

mrainey · « **Reply #1 on:** November 07, 2005, 10:16 AM »

I haven't measured its "resource consumption", but Avast seems to do a fine job on my system and doesn't cause any significant slowdowns.

m_s · « **Reply #2 on:** November 07, 2005, 11:20 AM »

I ran Avast for a few years, but dumped it awhile ago - too heavy for my system. AVG runs significantly lighter for me. But... I've come around to realising that you tend to get what you pay for with antivirus software, and both of these tend to score quite low on the comparative tests - I think Avast is a bit higher than AVG. If you're running free AV, be sure to have other layered security programs - things like a2, MS AntiSpyware, Kerio Personal Firewall, etc. As I say, I used free security programs for a long time - now I swear by NOD32 and Outpost for myself, and for others who want to stick with free things, usually a combination of AVG and Kerio for the lightest resource-usage.

dantheman · « **Reply #3 on:** November 07, 2005, 12:19 PM »

Thanks m_s for sharing your experience with AVG and AVAST.
Does this mean that you consider these two to be the tops in the "free" world?

m_s · « **Reply #4 on:** November 07, 2005, 02:04 PM »

Of the free programs, in my experience, they're the best - there is also AntiVir, which is very good for an-demand, but I don't think it gives resident protection...

mouser · « **Reply #5 on:** November 07, 2005, 02:46 PM »

antivir has quite good resident protection - it's my favorite free antivirus.

dantheman · « **Reply #6 on:** November 07, 2005, 02:54 PM »

If Mouser likes ANTIVIR then i guess we'll have to take a close look at it.
Perhaps we can hope to see a review about it in the near future?

A friend of mine has been having problems recently. It seems that viruses can be picked up just by looking at a webpage!

He had AVG7 and it did not detect it.

My PC has been doing fine without any AV. I rarely use IE (stick to Opera and Firefox).

m_s · « **Reply #7 on:** November 07, 2005, 03:11 PM »

You're a braver man than me! dantheBRAVEman!

dantheman · « **Reply #8 on:** November 07, 2005, 03:23 PM »

Thanks for the compliment m_s !

To others i'm probably just a NERD, placing my PC at risk (and others too!).

But if you look at it this way...
1. never open attachments without prior notification.
2. don't have floppies.
3. never open CDs from unknown sources.
4. block anyone on MSN or TRILLIAN CHAT program without approval.

Shouldn't this be just as good prevention as having an up to date AVG 7 that couldn't stop a virus from a webpage?

m_s · « **Reply #9 on:** November 07, 2005, 04:35 PM »

I would say that's why I opted for NOD... But Avast's web-shield does appear to be pretty good - I remember it catching a few site-based viruses as I surfed.

dantheman · « **Reply #10 on:** November 07, 2005, 05:20 PM »

m_s,

Does NOD have free version?
How is it on system resources?

Thanks for your input!

DTM

m_s · « **Reply #11 on:** November 07, 2005, 05:41 PM »

No, there's no free version, unfortunately, though they do have some free tools for cleaning and diagnosis on their website, and you can download a 30 day trial version from www.eset.com. I find it runs very light - right now, it's using about 15mb memory in total (two components combined). I'm running it on two Win XP machines, and have run it on two other machines with Win 98 (there are different versions of the program for Win XP and 98) - it's the only antivirus I've used where there seems to be no visible lag on the system.

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #12 on:** November 07, 2005, 06:27 PM »

The only problem I have noticed with NOD32 is the manual scanning of archives seems to cause a pause in my system. Otherwise it runs extremely light - it is one of its real pluses (and good protection of course). NOD32 is the choice of gamers (not that I am one) because it is so low impact.

I'm just hoping they aren't going to join on the bandwaggon with all the other software houses and produce a bloatware-version to compete!

m_s · « **Reply #13 on:** November 08, 2005, 03:32 AM »

I have heard a rumour (perhaps even started it, because I had word of it from an Eset engineer and then posted something about it here and at Wilders) that they are planning to integrate a firewall in the new year... And Kerio's stopping their personal firewall... And I think there's a rumour of Eset and Kerio merging or something like that. Oh, well, if there wasn't that rumour before, now it'll start running!

mouser · « **Reply #14 on:** November 08, 2005, 03:47 AM »

kerio and tiny are great lessons to developers of how to take a fantastic simple small program that is much loved, and turn it into an unfinishable giant mess that no one can use..

Edvard · « **Reply #15 on:** November 08, 2005, 11:39 AM »

If Mouser likes ANTIVIR then i guess we'll have to take a close look at it.
-dantheman (November 07, 2005, 02:54 PM)

Glad to hear a kind word from Mouser on AntiVir. I'm sold on it, personally. Updates frequently, has caught at least 5 viruses that others missed, protected me quite handily when I accidentally hit a warez site that promptly lobbed at LEAST 20+ v-bombs at me, doesn't filter my mail, but it'll sure speak up once I get around to opening THAT one. Personal Ed at home, Business Ed at work (cause I'm stuck on a NT4 workstation and AntiVir is just about the only one that works here) One weird thing, it is using (ATM) something like 15 megs or so (I've got 256 sysem megs) but I don't even notice. I've never noticed any difference in performance with it on or off. I checked. And besides, the disk scanner is named "Luke FileWalker"... How cool is that?

imtrobin · « **Reply #16 on:** November 08, 2005, 11:03 PM »

www.bitdefender.com

Innuendo · « **Reply #17 on:** November 09, 2005, 09:51 AM »

If you want the absolute best protection from viruses and trojans in one package there is no other choice but Kaspersky, but it is very resource-hungry.

If you want a solution lighter on resources,are willing to give up defense in the trojan area & put up with a few more false positives then NOD32 is what you want.

The new version of Symantec's corporate version of their AV (no way can you compare it to the consumer version being hawked in stores) is doing very well in tests & comparisons. It's amazing how much malware it can catch. However, some malware will knock its scanning engine out of commission & render it unable to run. That's a fatal flaw in my book. Couple that with the fact that Symantec is a very slimy company & ruins everything they touch I have vowed no Symantec software will ever reside on any of my PCs, but I mention their AV here for the people who do not dislike Symantec as much as I do.

BitDefender is not quite ready, IMHO. They were an absolutely crummy AV when first released but the latest version has really shown great strides towards becoming a great AV. Hopefully, next version will be the one that launches it to greatness.

I haven't used any freeware AV programs, but everywhere I go I only hear good things about AntiVir.

Second Shadow · « **Reply #18 on:** February 13, 2006, 02:50 PM »

I used Kaspersky a while ago, and while it is excellent at detection and real-time protection, it is a bit too much resource hungry.
Now I use NOD32 that has even better heuristics detetion (actually, it has THE BEST heuristics detection there is), but not such a big library. However, NOD32 is much lighter and gives me all the protection I need ... and them some.

May I suggest www.av-comparatives.org

It is the best antivirus comparison site I've found

LuckMan212 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 27, 2006, 02:20 AM »

I have started a thread that may be of interest to people subscribed to this thread..... over here:
https://www.donation...dex.php?topic=2566.0

it's part of the new "What's the Best..." section.

tf76 · « **Reply #20 on:** December 23, 2006, 08:55 AM »

Hey I found this a while back it helped me choose. I use a couple of on demand ones but AVAST is my favourite.

http://wiki.castleco...AntiVirus_Comparison

f0dder · « **Reply #21 on:** December 23, 2006, 10:46 AM »

I dunno whether to use Kaspersky or NOD32 - both are pretty great. Kaspersky might be a bit heavier, but it's behavioral blocking is really nifty. NOD32 migth catch a bit more things now and then, but it's at the cost of false positives - not something that I can afford at the place I admin. It also doesn't save it's "is this file already scanned?" database to disk, which makes it a bit slower at first-time-after-reboot scans than KAV.

STAY AWAY from BitDefender. It's scanning engine isn't all that good, and it's an unstable POS. I've had to disable hyperthreading on all P4 boxes to avoid BSODs.

tinjaw · « **Reply #22 on:** December 23, 2006, 11:10 AM »

f0dder,

Just some info. BitDefender uses two engines. the Kaspersky engine is one of them. I used BitDefender for two months and liked it. I had no problems. I was just about to buy it when AOL released their free AV stuff that uses the Ksaperky engine, so now I use the AOL AV stuff. I've used that for several months and it works well. Just my two cents.

f0dder · « **Reply #23 on:** December 23, 2006, 11:58 AM »

Hmm, are you sure BitDefender uses the KAV engine? I thought it used BullGuard stuff (since that's what some of the MS KB articles that I get from BSODs lead to)...

Doesn't matter if it uses the KAV AV engine for some things though, other of it's components (ie, the drivers) are shit unstable - four Pentium4's that need HyperThreading disabled don't lie. And golly I'm glad I finally got all boxes upgraded to XP, the BitDefender experience on Win9x was even worse.

Funny thing really, since it worked perfectly on my home box - which is why I chose it for my workplace >_<

dk70 · « **Reply #24 on:** December 23, 2006, 12:37 PM »

Bitdefender have their own engine. Bullguard license stuff including Bitdefender. Some AV I cant remember name of use both Bitdefender and Kaspersky.

False postive situation changes all the time. Check Avira/Antivir, used to be bad - now as good as Nod32. Matter of maintaince and since Avira is on a roll they look better. See latest retroactive test from AV-comparatives. Also show why Kaspersky is going to release new heuristic engine soon