Light AV - any suggestions?

Hello,
This is my first post here. I was wondering whether you could suggest any AV that is light (or even super-light)?
Thanks
Millic

 

Avira
F-prot
EAV
DrWeb
NAV

 

of course drweb

 

Me too!

Avg Pro also very light.

 

Add VBA32, Command and NOD v2 to the list.

However, you will have to trial some of these suggestions to see how they interact with your specific hardware/software mix.

 

No av is also very light

But it comes at a cost, pay now or pay later

 

The word "Light" is relative; it depends on your system configuration & power too. I find Avira, NOD 32 & Kaspersky easy on mine. I can also use Panda 2008, Norton 2008 & F-secure 2008 without compromising my speed too much. However Bit-Def & AVG Pro cause problems.
Now that you have the broad recommendations from others, just try them in your own machine & decide for yourself. In your position I would start with Avira or Eset.

 

Dr.web very light on the pc and your browsing very fast too

 

M c a f e e naturally

 

We had a recent thread on this topic, here:

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=194994

As I see it, if your system has enough RAM then there's no point in comparing how much memory the various AVs use, as this will have no discernable effect on system performance. Rather, I suggest you consider each AV's processor usage and the subsequent system performance hits that occur as users performs various tasks such as web browsing, running programs, copying files, checking email etc.

The results of PCWorld's April 2007 comparisons are a bit dated, but still useful. Here's the comparison chart from that article. I suggest you scroll down to the three "System Slowdown" rows:

http://www.pcworld.com/product/test...29899&prodid=29900&prodid=29901&prodid=29902#

According to the PCWorld results, in terms of system performance Panda, NOD32 and AVG were by far the lightest AVs of that bunch. Of course, you need to keep in mind that your own results will vary based on how you configure the program. For example, if you turn off the web scanning module (if present) then of course your browsing speed will go up.

Also, keep in mind that the greater performance hits produced by certain AV programs were probably caused by the more intensive scanning that they provide, which hopefully also provides increased protection against certain threats.

 

Thank you all for your advice. You're great!
I forgot to tell you that I was planning to install a fresh copy of Windows XP on my friend's (pretty old) laptop with insufficient RAM. This is why I asked for advice on the super-light AV.
Up till now, I've tested AviraPremium (which BTW I like very much) and KAV, but unfortunately, they both somehow seem very heavy. The AVs which I'm very impressed with are DrWeb, NOD32 and AVG. I'm going to let my friend decide between these three.
Thank you very much for your help.
Regards
Millic

P.S. Any suggestions on choosing a firewall? OA? CFP? (Or should I start a new thread in the firewall section?)

 

It would probably be a good idea to start a new thread in the FW section.
That way you will stay on topic and will receive plenty of suggestions.
BTW NOD32 v2 was very light for me.
Now it's Avira.

 

Google for anti virus overhead. There are a few tests out there.

 

Lightest one I have seen is Avira... it's truly light, if you check free ram before and after install, not just task manager. So it's light on ram usage, and it's also very light in terms of any performance hit.

 

Drweb is by far the lightest of all, it adds just 1% ram after installation, uses less than 1mb, low Vm and I/O usage, aswell as zero CPU usage

As light as some others are, there really is no
competition for lightness.

 

Now, post a pic with "processes from all users" checked.

 

If it has low i/o it's probably not doing much. No surprise it doesn't do well on the AV tests.

Notepad is probably the lightest. It doesn't catch many virii however.

 

Small footprint is due to Smart mode in SpIDerGuard, which is a balance between performance and protection.

You are not suggesting that "Heavier" AVs would have a greater detection rate that their lighter counterparts?

 

true,

as for processes for all users, its the same for drweb, you just see the rest of other things running such as audio, video or whatrver you might have running etc

 

Again, I do not understand how one can judge an antivirus light or not by the memory used.
And anyway, if you want to evaluate by that criterion, then you have to push further the study (virtual memory used, etc).

I am currently trying “BitDefender 2008”. According to the screenshot below, should we say it’s light / lightest than DrWeb?
I don’t believe (Even if I find it very well and without too much lag)

Finally, one last comment. Xandros, you have 1.5 GB of RAM! And more ..you’re on XP. Why focus as much on the RAM used?
What would you say if you had then G DATA Antivirus, which requires around 120 Mo?

 

Judging from the comments, it would be best to list the heavy AV's.

 

G DATA, TrustPort, without problem.

 

So to the OP, practically all AV's are light.

 

f course, all factors should be noticed when judging a light av, or the lightest.

ram, CPU, I/O, space on hd, size of updates, vm usage etc

Hence the winner, drweb

 

I never said that I gave an exhaustive list. Of course that there should be many more, but I did not test all (and I do not want)

And CSJ quite right.
Of course it should also depend on the machine you have. Maybe while on a Intel Quad XX GHz, HD SCSI RAID, some heavy antivirus must appear lighter perhaps??