ok, which paid antivirus is best? :)

[Lawrence Connor]

I have used some form or other or many different antivirus over the years

including

KAV
NOD32
BitDefender

Norton

McAfee

AVG
avast
AntiVir

and perhaps others

I am looking to get a new one now
not free but paid, so I can try to get
whatever I feel may be the best ;) lol

oh alright well what is the best site reviews of antivirus?

thank you for any helpful info I appreciate any useful tips thanks

[ErikAlbert]

This one, well-known at Wilders :
http://www.av-comparatives.org/
F-Secure Anti-Virus might be your next one.

[Lawrence Connor]

alright I will look this site over thank you

[BlueZannetti]

LC,

Some reasonably comprehensive detection tests are provided at av-comparatives.org (http://www.av-comparatives.org/). Don't read just the numbers, but what's behind them, and the degree to which they differentiate products. Personally, I tend to view those receiving an Advanced+ rating as at the "top" with respect to detection and equivalent.

However, raw detection is only one dimension of use. There are a number of other items which can be weighed in making a decision, some of which could place a contender rated lower on raw detection at the top of your personal list. Unfortunately, many of these issues (GUI relative to your optimum look-and-feel, impact on system performance, configurability in your hands, compatibility with other software on your system, etc.) are local to you and/or your system.

Blue

[Lawrence Connor]

right, and active, or real time, protections or guards are imprtant too of course

[Lawrence Connor]

ok at first glance of the comparison I saw
it looks to me that these 3 following are
closely matched as among the best imo


AntiVirusKit (AVK)
(G DATA Security)


KAV Personal Pro
(Kaspersky Labs)


F-Secure Anti-Virus
(F-Secure)


I had never heard of AVK or G DATA before.

I don't especially like that
On-demand detection of dialers
was not present for F-Secure, but
it's numbers were very good otherwise.

I do know Kaspersky and the info at their
own site about KAV Personal Pro looks good


apparently AntiVirusKit (AVK) by G DATA
uses both Kaspersky KAV and BitDefender ("DoubleScan")
engines, and now it seems a third thing, too,
which they call "OutbreakShield" (a "third security shield")

but what is not clear to me is what versions of each
of Kaspersky and BitDefender they use in AVK and if
the versions of KAV & BitDefender in use in AVK are the newest

or if the versions available seperately from Kaspersky and/or BitDefender
are the newest versions respectively, which are not included in the AVK.

IF the Kaspersky and BitDefender antivirus engines in AntiVirusKit (AVK)
ARE, in fact, also the newest versions available from each vendor, THEN
AVK (AntiVirusKit) would seem to be my preferred choice for myself.

But this is unclear and I cannot be sure of that yet, for now.

AVK did show the best numbers though, but I trust KAV most by my
own experience of these that showed as the best looking three to me.

[Lawrence Connor]

well I found this stuff too besides the info at av-comparatives.org site

this virus.gr site has a test that shows Kaspersky is the best

http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=72&mnu=72

Rank

1. Kaspersky Personal Pro version 5.0.390- 99.46%

Kaspersky 2006 beta version 6.0.15.222- 99.46%

2. F-Secure 2006 version 6.10.330 - 96.92%

3. CyberScrub version 1.0 - 96.62%

4. eScan Virus Control version 2.6.522.9 - 95.21%

5. McAfee version 10.0.27 - 94.80%

6. BitDefender version 9 - 90.75%

7. Nod32 version 2.50.41 - 88.79%

8. AntiVir Personal version 6.32.00.51 - 86.55%

9. MKS_VIR 2005 - 86.16%

10. Norton Professional version 2006 - 85.17%

[Blackcat]

The test-bed and methodology used in this test have been questioned before. (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=116953&highlight=VirusP)

Much better to look at a range of testing sites; AntiVirus Test Centre, AV-Test.org, VirusBulletin, CheckVir, Checkmark for example.

Then trial some of the AV's you are interested in and see which ones run the best on your system.

Then the best AV is the one that offers you good protection, good support and does not affect system performance on your computer.

[Lawrence Connor]

cool, thanks, I found this curious website too.....

http://kaspersky.com/viruswatch3

it gets stuck for me?, or is supposed to do not much at all?

I posted at Kaspersky forum also

http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showtopic=12137

I am trying KAV 6 now :)

[RejZoR]

(not listed in any order)
Kaspersky
BitDefender
NOD32
McAfee
Symantec
F-Secure
AntiVirusKit (GDATA)
AntiVir Premium

Either one you chose, they are all top paid programs. Just select the one that fits you best. You may also wonder why the heck is AntiVir up there but they certanly deserve to be there with their latest AntiVir 7...
So choice is yours. KAV engine based (except upcoming KAV6) tend to be a bit heavier on system (especially GDATA), but in general they all perform well on 3200+ and 512MB of RAM and 200GB 5400RPM 8MB cache ATA133 HDD.

[Blackcat]

-{ Quote: "cool, thanks, I found this curious website too.....

http://kaspersky.com/viruswatch3

it gets stuck for me?, or is supposed to do not much at all?" }-
There have been past (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=124379&highlight=kaspersky+viruswatch) problems with this site.

Try this one. (http://www.idepro.fr/kaspersky/esac/kav_virlistd.asp)

-{ Quote: " I am trying KAV 6 now :)" }-
You have made a good start ;) :D

[Lawrence Connor]

I have an ABS Ultimate M6 bought in early November 2004

AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 CPU (2.6 GHz but equiv. to 4.0 GHz P4)

2 GB dual channel RAM

2 HDD (Two Hard Disk Drives (NOT in any RAID))

one 250 GB maxtor SATA HDD ATA 133
this is now my main Hard Drive
and the one I am booted into now
which I intend to get new AV for

one WD 74 GB SATA HDD (10,000 RPM) ATA 133
used to be main HDD, but not anymore
I have KAV 5.0 Personal on this HDD
(this Windows XP became very buggy)

these are seperate drives with seperate OS, NOT in RAID
which I have to install and update any software seperately,
as I did not want RAID, and ordered it this way, without RAID.

Thanks for any help

[RejZoR]

Considering all the horsepower you have, you should be fine with any of these.
So it's up to what you prefer more (GUI, update frequency, tech support etc)...

[Blackcat]

Lawrence, I see (http://www.av-comparatives.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=244) you have made a good choice ;)

[TradeMark]

Lawrence a very good choice KAV 6 Rulezzz;)

Good luck with it:thumb:

[Lawrence Connor]

Yep. 8) thanks again

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "

KAV
NOD32
BitDefender
" }-

In my opinion...you've tried the top 3 right here...it's down to personal preference for you.

[Lawrence Connor]

that was my feeling too that those were the three best there
but I wasn't sure which of those three were the best of them
but it's kinda like they are so close it's not so easy to call

[storm119]

LC,

Another things to consider beside those mentioned above .... Imho you should look what "Features" available come with it .... ;)

Good Luck

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "that was my feeling too that those were the three best there
but I wasn't sure which of those three were the best of them
but it's kinda like they are so close it's not so easy to call" }-

My opinion is..there can be more than one brands that "is the best". You can have several.

It's like asking "What is the best car?"

Best "For what?" What are your driving habits, what do you like, what do you wish to do. Ask 12 different people "What is the best car"..and you could quite possibly get 12 different answers...and each answer is probably correct...for the person who answered it.

My thoughts...Kapersky has had the reputation of having the best detection rates, from most reputable sources. Historically it had a reputation of slowing downs PCs...it seems their recent version has lightened up substantially.

NOD32 has had a solid reputation for quite a while..and it's been catching up to Kapersky in detection..nipping right at its heels. It's also been known to be very light weight..in system performance impact. Me being a hardcore online FPS gamer..that was one of my deciding factors...probably the biggest factor for me.

It's kind of...finding what works for you, on your system.

[pykko]

the top 3 are definetely nod32, kaspersky, bit defender (random order). Others such as F-Secure, AVK, etc use their engines so ... I don't even look at them. ;D

[Lawrence Connor]

thanks everyone, I have KAV 6 now :)

[JerryM]

-{ Quote: "thanks everyone, I have KAV 6 now :)" }-

I am also trialing KAV 6, and am surprised at how light it is on memory. It is even lighter than NOD.

After you trial it awhile give us a report as to how you assess it.

Jerry

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "I am also trialing KAV 6, and am surprised at how light it is on memory. It is even lighter than NOD.

After you trial it awhile give us a report as to how you assess it.

Jerry" }-

It amazes me, that you find Kav 6 lighter than Nod.......here it is exactly the other way around. How is your Kav configured, standard or did you do some surgery?
I have stated here before, Dr. Web and Kav really slow my system down too much. I really liked Kav 6, but the slowdown made me uninstall again.

[SSK]

Hmmm, must be someting on your system then. KAV 6 / NOD32 are *at least* equal on my machine. :)

[JerryM]

I admit I am also surprised. Here are the figures that show now. On the machine with KAV the total memory use is 11,757 K.
On the laptop the memory use of NOD32 is 22,216 K.

Although these are two different machines the memory use on the laptop is essentially what it was on the desktop when I trialed it.
One browser was open on both machines.

I have KAV configured pretty much as default, except that I have the “scan new and changed files only” option checked. With it unchecked the memory use is 13,004 K.

Evidently KAV has done some work on resource usage. I had read of that with KAV 6 and find it true. I guess different machines react differently.

Best,
Jerry

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "Hmmm, must be someting on your system then. KAV 6 / NOD32 are *at least* equal on my machine. :)" }-

But how do you have Kav configured? Standard or also different settings?
And do you have any idea about something being wrong with my system? Nod32 soars all over...never had any slowdown whatsoever.

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "I admit I am also surprised. Here are the figures that show now. On the machine with KAV the total memory use is 11,757 K.
On the laptop the memory use of NOD32 is 22,216 K.

Although these are two different machines the memory use on the laptop is essentially what it was on the desktop when I trialed it.
One browser was open on both machines.

I have KAV configured pretty much as default, except that I have the “scan new and changed files only” option checked. With it unchecked the memory use is 13,004 K.

Evidently KAV has done some work on resource usage. I had read of that with KAV 6 and find it true. I guess different machines react differently.

Best,
Jerry" }-

True, about different machines reacting differently.....but the strange thing is, there is very few people having trouble with the slowdowns with Kav. I keep wondering what's so different about my machine!
Had the same with Bitdefender....just crawling.
During the Kav 6 trial, even Total Commander took long to open up and that bothers me badly!

[Blackcat]

Default settings here of KAV 6.0.0.299, except I have the Streaming scan option enabled in the HTTP Scanner. The two running processes of avp.exe only total 7324K VM here after about 60 minutes of surfing. One of these processes takes up over 25MB RAM on boot-up but this quickly drops to a much lower level.

On my systems, although NOD is slightly heavier in RAM usage it feels as light as KAV 6 as the actual memory footprint does not always translate to an effect on system performance.

Benvan, there must be some sort of software/hardware conflict of your computer with KAV 6/Dr Web. This sometimes happens. For example, I cannot run F-Prot for Windows as a primary scanner on my main desktop despite it's RTM only taking up 612K VM but it runs without any problems at all on another 2 systems here!!! Work that one out!

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "Default settings here of KAV 6.0.0.299, except I have the Streaming scan option enabled in the HTTP Scanner. The two running processes of avp.exe only total 7324K VM here after about 60 minutes of surfing. One of these processes takes up over 25MB RAM on boot-up but this quickly drops to a much lower level.

On my systems, although NOD is slightly heavier in RAM usage it feels as light as KAV 6 as the actual memory footprint does not always translate to an effect on system performance.

Benvan, there must be some sort of software/hardware conflict of your computer with KAV 6/Dr Web. This sometimes happens. For example, I cannot run F-Prot for Windows as a primary scanner on my main desktop despite it's RTM only taking up 612K VM but it runs without any problems at all on another 2 systems here!!! Work that one out!" }-

Yes Blackcat, there's something weird here. This week I'll be installing a clean Win XP Home with SP-2 on another partition and nothing else!!!! I'll give the 'slow' scanners another try and report back here.

[SSK]

-{ Quote: "But how do you have Kav configured? Standard or also different settings?
And do you have any idea about something being wrong with my system? Nod32 soars all over...never had any slowdown whatsoever." }-
Default settings for KAV 6. About your system: other real-time monitors, scanners, (cheese ;D)... Probably Gremlins running around your MOBO.

I don't know, hope your reinstall will solve it.

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "Default settings for KAV 6. About your system: other real-time monitors, scanners, (cheese ;D)... Probably Gremlins running around your MOBO.

I don't know, hope your reinstall will solve it." }-

There's very little realtime, a mailchecking tool Mailmoa, Spy Stopper Pro and Msn and that's it. Could be the cheese, I grease my cooler with that once a year! ;D

[Benvan45]

Installed Kav 6.0 on other partition with XP Home SP-2 (clean install)! Nothing running.........opening files or whatever, takes too long for me compared to Nod32. It must be my hardware, it can't be software.
Also tried Dr. Web, the latest.....same story, slow....slow, slow.
Bitdefender.....even worse!
Removed the buggers.......back to Nod32 and I'm flying like a butterfly.
AVG Pro is another super fast and lean running scanner! But......compared to Nod32 in detection......don't think so.
Sorry to say.......no more experimenting for me with all those great AV scanners, as I will probably need a new system in order to run these 'great' scanners.
I'll stick to Nod32 and nothing else!
Any sponsoring for a new computer with one of these 'slow' AV scanners, is very welcome!!! ;D

[Blackcat]

-{ Quote: "Installed Kav 6.0 on other partition with XP Home SP-2 (clean install)! Nothing running.........opening files or whatever, takes too long for me compared to Nod32. It must be my hardware, it can't be software." }-
Did you carry out a full on-demand scan first. Everything, including the RTM, speeds up after this.
-{ Quote: " Back to Nod32 and I'm flying like a butterfly.Sorry to say.......no more experimenting for me with all those great AV scanners, as I will probably need a new system in order to run these 'great' scanners.
I'll stick to Nod32 and nothing else!" }-
Always best to stick with the one that suits you and your system the best ;)

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "Did you carry out a full on-demand scan first. Everything, including the RTM, speeds up after this.

Always best to stick with the one that suits you and your system the best ;)" }-

Did not carry out a full on-demand scan, as I did not know this would make a difference......too bad. Understand the trick, but Nod32 does not need this done, so.....but thanks for the tip. One never knows what happens in the near future.
Thanks for your concern again. ;)

[Benvan45]

Surprise, surprise........ I couldn't resist it of course. Reinstalled Kav 6.0 and did a full on-demand scan, took over two hours!!!!! Re-started my computer and waited for the good stuff to come.
Guess what? It didn't make any difference at all in speed. It takes just as long to open files or urls. One of my test cases is always Total Commander, just opening it in some dir and then looking at the performance of the installed AV scanner........Kav's 'golden wheel' showed up for a few seconds and that's how long it takes to open just a small, simple dir in Total Commander. It sure as hell beats me all to pieces, but this is final!!!!
Standard configurations.......all the way!
Back to Nod32 again.....and I even deleted all the other 'great' other AV scanners from my system!
Sorry, but if it is my computer acting as the bottleneck, why aren't other scanners, like Nod32, AVG Pro, eTrust, F-prot affected by this?
The slowdowners are: Kav, Bitdefender, Dr.Web as far as I have tested these different times.
Final now.....no more testing.....just using Nod32!

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Final now.....no more testing.....just using Nod32!" }-
Only NOD32 ? No other on-demand AV scanner to remove the remaining threats ? :lurking:

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "Only NOD32 ? No other on-demand AV scanner to remove the remaining threats ? :lurking:" }-

No, just rely on the one thing......!! Never had any problems yet. Used different online scanners, just to make sure, but always clean!
The only thing I use besides Nod, is a anti spyware program.
I am behind a router and that makes a difference as well!

[Mele20]

-{ Quote: "Default settings here of KAV 6.0.0.299, except I have the Streaming scan option enabled in the HTTP Scanner. The two running processes of avp.exe only total 7324K VM here after about 60 minutes of surfing. One of these processes takes up over 25MB RAM on boot-up but this quickly drops to a much lower level.

On my systems, although NOD is slightly heavier in RAM usage it feels as light as KAV 6 as the actual memory footprint does not always translate to an effect on system performance.

Benvan, there must be some sort of software/hardware conflict of your computer with KAV 6/Dr Web. This sometimes happens. For example, I cannot run F-Prot for Windows as a primary scanner on my main desktop despite it's RTM only taking up 612K VM but it runs without any problems at all on another 2 systems here!!! Work that one out!" }-

I've had KAV 2006 on here about two hours. Using 29,000k virtual memory. I can't imagine any AV using as little as you say KAV uses on your machine. Bit Defender routinely used around 40,000k. I see some only set it to default? I never do that with any AV. Set it to scan all file types and I turned off the scan only changed and new files. I don't know why AV companies set up default so badly. NOD32 does the same thing.

I don't have the HTTP scanner or the Email scanner. If I had those KAV sure would be using a lot of RAM.

I never do a full scan with an AV. I hate those. I won't do one with KAV either.

I'd like to just go back to BD free as that was great and all I needed but now that I have used BD Pro 9.5, I can't use the free version.

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "I've had KAV 2006 on here about two hours. Using 29,000k virtual memory. I can't imagine any AV using as little as you say KAV uses on your machine. Bit Defender routinely used around 40,000k. I see some only set it to default? I never do that with any AV. Set it to scan all file types and I turned off the scan only changed and new files. I don't know why AV companies set up default so badly. NOD32 does the same thing.

I don't have the HTTP scanner or the Email scanner. If I had those KAV sure would be using a lot of RAM.

I never do a full scan with an AV. I hate those. I won't do one with KAV either.

I'd like to just go back to BD free as that was great and all I needed but now that I have used BD Pro 9.5, I can't use the free version." }-

That's what I hate as well, the full scans and I agree also with your statement, that a scanner should be configured standard with scanning 'all files' and most AV scanners don't, as it has a great impact on the resources and all companies want the 'lightest'!
I have Nod32 configured to scan 'all files' and never notice any difference in performance.

[SSK]

My KIS 6 (Without MailAV / AntiSpam / AIC) uses ~ 18k Mem / ~ 19.5k VM. Nod32 uses around the same on my machine. :)

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "I've had KAV 2006 on here about two hours. Using 29,000k virtual memory. I can't imagine any AV using as little as you say KAV uses on your machine. Bit Defender routinely used around 40,000k. I see some only set it to default? I never do that with any AV. Set it to scan all file types and I turned off the scan only changed and new files. I don't know why AV companies set up default so badly. NOD32 does the same thing.

I don't have the HTTP scanner or the Email scanner. If I had those KAV sure would be using a lot of RAM.

I never do a full scan with an AV. I hate those. I won't do one with KAV either.

I'd like to just go back to BD free as that was great and all I needed but now that I have used BD Pro 9.5, I can't use the free version." }- Kis 6.0 with everything enabled uses around 27mb virtual memory (total memory use 32mb) on my pc, but it will go up and down as you use the pc, in daily use it is very low though.

[Graystoke]

This is what I found when while running KAV 6. After install, all defaults except I put a check in the box for Potentially Dangerous Software, there is very little affect on browsing speed. After I ran a full scan, everything slowed down a lot. It seemed to take forever for a page to open. The little yellow gear, what ever that is, in the KAV icon was spinning. It took a couple of minutes before browsing speed was somewhat back to normal. The time between the end of the full scan and when I came back to the computer was about an hour.

Anyone else have this type of experience. I'm running XP Home/SP2, 512 RAM, cable connection.

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "This is what I found when while running KAV 6. After install, all defaults except I put a check in the box for Potentially Dangerous Software, there is very little affect on browsing speed. After I ran a full scan, everything slowed down a lot. It seemed to take forever for a page to open. The little yellow gear, what ever that is, in the KAV icon was spinning. It took a couple of minutes before browsing speed was somewhat back to normal. The time between the end of the full scan and when I came back to the computer was about an hour.

Anyone else have this type of experience. I'm running XP Home/SP2, 512 RAM, cable connection." }-

Start reading from post #24......that's exactly what I mean as well. I am really glad, I am not the only one having the terrible slowdown and I am sure now, it's not just my system.
I hope someone can throw a light on this problem. I have read the same on other forums.
I am running XP Pro SP2 Amd AthlonXP 1800+ 512 Ram and Dsl. Nothing special in real time.

[Graystoke]

-{ Quote: "Start reading from post #24......that's exactly what I mean as well. I am really glad, I am not the only one having the terrible slowdown and I am sure now, it's not just my system.
I hope someone can throw a light on this problem. I have read the same on other forums.
I am running XP Pro SP2 Amd AthlonXP 1800+ 512 Ram and Dsl. Nothing special in real time." }-


Hi Benvan45.

I like this new KAV 6, but not sure I want to keep it if it's going to affect my computer this way. The last couple of weeks I've been testing NOD32 and KAV 6 on my computer, because I have become disinchanted with the AV I was using. NOD seems to run a lot lighter than KAV on my computer. The only thing I don't like about NOD is the High Compatability/High Effeciency settings. I feel I always have to check the settings to make sure nothing new is set to HC. There always seemed to be one or two new apps there set at HC. :( I'll run KAV 6 a day or two more, and if things stay the way they are, I'll probably put NOD back on.

[Peter2150]

I haven't experienced any slow down with KAV 6.0 surfing. I do have File AV turned off. As to memory usage:

Both AVP processes currently after running all day

Mem Usage Peak Mem Usage VM Size

7380 42700 23700

As to Scanning. First full scan took 1.2 hours. Subsequent scans take 4-6 minutes which is why I've turned off File AV. Do a full scan every night at shutdown.

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "Do a full scan every night at shutdown." }-

Why on earth? Don't you trust the real time protection?

[Peter2150]

-{ Quote: "Why on earth? Don't you trust the real time protection?" }-

I never said that. I leave on Mail AV, Web AV and the Proactive Defense Modules. That way anything coming from the outside is scanned. But no need to have a larger data files scanned every time they are opened. Then the full scan every night checks everything. Actually for the same reason's I have disabled the startup scan.

Pete

[Mele20]

I couldn't believe just now that it took KAV 1 minute 23 seconds to scan a critical patch from Microsoft that I had downloaded to disk. BitDefender would have scanned that in about one-third the time or less and NOD32 would have done it so fast that it would have finished before I blinked. KAV seemed to stick at 50% scanned. I have never ever seen a percentage bar with other AV as they scan too fast for that to show I suppose.

I haven't noticed surfing slowdowns so we'll see how it goes. If the only slow thing is on demand scanning well....I can live with that I suppose. I don't like HTTP scanning or email scanning. I depend on a good on demand scanner instead so I hope not everything I scan from the command line is this slow.

As to another report of slowdowns after running the first full scan...well, good thing I guess that I don't like full scans and hardly ever do them. At least Benvan45, you know you aren't alone!

[Graystoke]

I decided not to wait. I just was not happy with the performance of my computer with KAV 6 on it. I'm not bashing KAV 6, because I do like it, but it just doesn't work well with my computer. I installed NOD, and my computer is humming along. Very nice. :)

[Benvan45]

-{ Quote: "I decided not to wait. I just was not happy with the performance of my computer with KAV 6 on it. I'm not bashing KAV 6, because I do like it, but it just doesn't work well with my computer. I installed NOD, and my computer is humming along. Very nice. :)" }-

Good for you and indeed too bad about Kav 6, as it looks great and detection is great, but performance should be great also!

[CJsDad]

-{ Quote: " KAV 6 / NOD32 are *at least* equal on my machine. :)" }-

Same here, I have a license for both programs and I can't tell the difference.
The time to run a complete scan with NOD32 is much shorter than KAV 6.0 but as far as one program being faster than the other in terms of pages downloading or making a PC faster of slower I see no difference.
I wonder sometimes when I read these types of threads how do people determine fast and slow programs.
Whats fast to one person may seem slow to another and vice versa.
I don't use the default settings for either program, I visit the same exact web sites as I always do and I still don't see any difference.

[Graystoke]

-{ Quote: "Same here, I have a license for both programs and I can't tell the difference.
I wonder sometimes when I read these types of threads how do people determine fast and slow programs.
" }-


Well I definately can tell. With KAV 6, I can go from one page to another quickly enough, but it takes a little long for the page to open completely. Even my Outlook Express opens a little slower with KAV 6. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking minutes, but it is several seconds. It seem to get even worse after a full system scan. I don't know why KAV 6 acts this way on my computer, but it does. I wish it didn't because I like everything else about it. Who knows, maybe I'll give it another try one of these days.

[dja2k]

I have gone to crazy hieghts with KAV and KIS 2006 running it along side such as Online Armor, Spyware Doctor, Ghost Security Suite, RegRun Gold, Ewido, ProcessGuard not all together though but some yes and I have never seen a slow down like what is mentioned here. The only slow down I have seen is some in browser speed compared in KB\s when running speed tests , but I have a 5 MB downstream line, so I can't tell the minor difference. As far as resources go, I think KAV\KIS is by far the winner even if all modules are installed. Don't get me wrong, all the other AV's mentioned here are great protection too, but I think they use a little more resources for my taste. The one that comes close to KAV 2006 would probably by Nod32. And like others say, I wouldn't use a knockoff AV who uses someone elses engine too, with the exception being OA AV+ when its completely done.

dja2k

[lotuis]

Kav 6 takes large CPU Usage.
:lurking: System Resource=CPU Usage+Mem Usage.

[Blackcat]

-{ Quote: "Kav 6 takes large CPU Usage.
:lurking: System Resource=CPU Usage+Mem Usage." }-
Have you enabled "Application Integrity Control" or "Registry Guard" in the ProactiveDefense Module? These are not the default settings and these 2 can give high CPU spikes on some sytems.

Otherwise you might have a conflict with other software on your machine. No problems here with either avp.exe.

[dja2k]

I am at 0% CPU usage too when nothing is going on. You might have something fishy going on in your computer. ;)

dja2k