bitdefender or nod32

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by theshadow247, Dec 4, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,325
    Location:
    US
    Nope, did not work. I excluded every MacroExpress folder and file that I could find on my system -- no go. Thanks for the suggestion though.

    Acadia
     
  2. KDNeese

    KDNeese Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Posts:
    236
    Maybe it's just me, but in all of this debate there seems to be an important point not being made - and that is, how susceptible is an antivirus to being disabled by malware? I work on people's computers on a daily basis, and I can tell you there are a lot of new nasties out there that can take out your antivirus in a heartbeat. The only AV that seems to be immune to this nastiness is NOD32, maybe because it runs at the kernel level. I have had several instances in the last couple of weeks where people's antiviruses have simply disappeared. I go to check the program files for the AV and they have been eaten away. To me, what good is an AV if a trojan or other virus can zap it before the AV has a chance to detect it? I know there are other AVs that claim to run in kernel mode, but why is it that I see those wiped out, but don't see the same thing happening to NOD32? Anyway, just wanted to throw that in there. I know everyone has their own preference, but I am simply going by what I see on a daily basis. I see all the other AVs blasted by malware, yet NOD32 seems to be untouched. As far as my computer, I want to run something that catches and destroys the virus or trojan rather than the other way around. I have used the free version of Bitdefender and, quite frankly, was not all that impressed. The paid version may be better and more effective, but since I've never used it, I can't say one way or another. However, I have seen Bitdefender eaten away by malware while NOD32 stays intact. Gotta go with the evidence I see, I guess. From daily experience and hence a dreadful sense of trojan paranoia, I have to give the edge to NOD32, which is why I run it on MY OWN computer...
     
  3. Smokey

    Smokey Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2002
    Posts:
    1,514
    Location:
    Annie's Pub
    And that's the real NOD32 problem.

    It's a top-notch AV, but in the setup and use not easy.

    And that's a pity, a lot of people like (or love) NOD32, and they are right, but are afraid for the issues you mentioned.
     
  4. bs259

    bs259 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Posts:
    141
    Location:
    Queens, NYC
    sorry if this has already been asked and answered but i havent seen it, what are blackspears settings for nod32?
     
  5. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,752
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
  6. sweater

    sweater Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,678
    Location:
    Philippines, the Political Dynasty Capital of the
    How about if I put BitDefender in the protection lists of ProcessGuard or GhostSecurity Suite? :rolleyes: Do you think it can still be "eaten" away? o_O
     
  7. Don Pelotas

    Don Pelotas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    2,257
    Don't worry too much over KDNeese's post's about Nod being the only AV capable of protecting it's processes, it's not true and if you use BitDefender with ProcessGuard or the Ghost Security Suite you're very well protected.:)

    Btw. When ProcessGuard was released; Wayne called PG the perfect choice for Nod, because at that time it wasn't that good at protecting it's processes.......how time fly's.;)
     
  8. sweater

    sweater Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,678
    Location:
    Philippines, the Political Dynasty Capital of the
    Oh...many tnx Don Pelotas. ;) You made me feel secured. :D
     
  9. Alphalutra1

    Alphalutra1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Posts:
    1,160
    Location:
    127.0.0.0/255.0.0.0
    Re: nod32 vs Bitdefender

    I prefer NOD and here is why:
    1)Bitdefender Gui has to close, and then reload after every update(which is very frequent). This drains memory and cpu cycles from the machine and causes slowups on my pc when I trialed it
    2)NOD takes up less system resources
    3) NOD scans much quicker, and thus allows the user to configure maximum settings for on-access scanning without expecting slowups, Bitdefender, with maximum settings made my pc stutter(3.2 ghz CPU 1 gb ram 256 MB graphics card) whenever I opened up the folder with all my downloads
    4) When I tried to remove bitdefender from my pc, I would always get a BSOD before the uninstallation occured. I then had to download another copy, install it(having a BSOD the first time) then uninstall it(thankfully, no BSOD)
    5) NOD has better signature detection and better heuristic detection (see the latest http://www.av-comparatives.org/)
    Alphalutra1
     
  10. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,752
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
  11. mvdu

    mvdu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2003
    Posts:
    1,166
    Location:
    PA
    I prefer BitDefender. I just think it's quicker to add signatures and also has good heuristics. I don't mind the GUI closing. The only negative is having to re-boot sometimes after updates.
     
  12. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,251
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    A mistake on my part.....I concentrate more on trojans and backdoors while saying "signature based detection". For detection of trojans and backdoors, BD is slightly better than NOD32 according to AV-comparatives. NOD32 is better at virus/worm detection.

    So basically the two AVs are neck-and-neck at each other, though NOD32 has the edge in heuristics. :)
     
  13. mantra

    mantra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Posts:
    6,167
    i tried bitdefender but it's more more slow then nod32
     
  14. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,251
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    I also found BitDefender to be more resource heavy than NOD on my PC....it was one of the factors that made me buy NOD32 instead of BitDefender.

    But it may not be slow for everyone - How fast or how slow an AV runs on a PC is determined by the PC's hardware configuration and the software installed on the PC. :)
     
  15. bellgamin

    bellgamin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    8,102
    Location:
    Hawaii
    If there ever comes a reason for me to switch from DrWeb, I will almost certainly go to the land of NOD. Why NOD & not BD? Mainly because NOD has Blackspear & Happy Bytes & Wilders forums, & BD doesn't. Shazam!:thumb:
     
  16. mantra

    mantra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Posts:
    6,167
    I tried bitdifender into a great pc !
    but it's very slow if i compare to nod32
    but it founds many trojan and virii that nod missed!
     
  17. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,456
    Please refrain from creating another flame that AV x is better than AV y because it detected some threats missed by the other. Are you sure that all those samples were actually functional? Are you sure you checked them with Advanced heuristics and Runtime packers enabled? Was the virus signature fully up to date? If you answered yes to all question, then you should remember that no AV in the world detects all 100% of threats. That's the way the cookie crumbles. There are tons of examples where NOD32 detected a threat missed by other AVs so please refrain from bashing as it would be a road to nowhere.
     
  18. Happy Bytes

    Happy Bytes Guest

    :rolleyes: :eek: :D :D :-*
    I always thought you hate me :eek:
     
  19. Triple Helix

    Triple Helix Specialist

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2004
    Posts:
    13,269
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    We all love You!! :D :D
     
  20. bellgamin

    bellgamin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    8,102
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Well said!
    Denn Liebe tut dem Nächsten nichts Böses. So ist nun die Liebe des Gesetzes Erfüllung.
     
  21. wolfeyes89

    wolfeyes89 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Posts:
    22
    I found that weird it happened on my system too bit defender performed better even tough its interferance is more grpahical than nod 32, but i stuck with nod 32 at the end soemthing just told me 2 and now its not that heavy really its only using 13k of system resources and the scanning is fastaer than nortons and thats using both the scanners one after another.
     
  22. wolfeyes89

    wolfeyes89 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Posts:
    22
    I AGREE U CREATED NOD 32 THE BEST AV ON PLANET.
     
  23. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    I have had NOD32 for two years but with the introduction of IMON internet module it really slowed my computer. I then used BD free for a year as my sole AV. I now have BD 9 Pro version and I love it. The only thing I don't like is that I had to turn off auto updating and just update manually and even then some updates ( like the last one) require rebooting. Ugh. I hate that and I haven't rebooted yet. It means I have to shut down my virtual machine as well. It is a big hassle to have to reboot for an av update. Other than the updating problems, I really like BD. Plus, I just got confirmation today that BD will soon have a 64bit edition.
     
  24. q1aqza

    q1aqza Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Posts:
    312
    Sound alike a lot of hassle to me :doubt: Give me an AV that updates itself with no reboots anyday.
     
  25. Edwin024

    Edwin024 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    1,008
    That's a lie ;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.