How much ram memory for newest avira and newest avast?

Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

Malware authors are counting on a lot of low-hanging fruit of which there is plenty, even on the newer OSs. Why would they waste their time trying to code an exploit that bypasses LUA & SRP, DEP, EMET, etc. when they know that ~98% of the Windows users are running as admin? With so many users logged in on admin accounts with a virus scanner that expired six months ago it's like shooting fish in a barrel for them.

luciddream's posting here explains pretty well what I'm talking about.

 

+1 Have XP rig locked down with exact config, except OA instead of Comodo. Now we'll wait & see.

 

I can give you 100+ reasons why......

Anyway, as you already mentioned: "everyone is entitled to an opinion", so stick with yours, I will stay with mine.
Time will tell.....

 

You should post them, a lot of people might be interested.

 

Do you represent them? If not, let these people to ask.

For the very same reason:
99% of the houses are unprotected, banks are fully protected.
Guess where the thieves mostly go.

From my side: End of story.

 

Malware authors don't even have to try and bypass LUA or SRP when the underlying mechanisms of an operating system is exploitable to give their code privilege elevation and/or arbitrary execution. An example would be this fairly recent kernel vulnerability hxxps://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/ms13-053 .

 

That may not be the best example, did you read the Mitigating Factors?

"An attacker must have valid logon credentials and be able to log on to exploit this vulnerability."

If someone has that, you're pwned anyway.

To set one thing straight, I don't use XP anymore and I'm not planning on it in the future. But some people just can't upgrade for whatever reasons, hardware, software they need, no money, whatever. With a little effort and research, you can make it significantly more secure. Some people have to make the best of the situation they're in and others yelling at them to upgrade when they may not be able to doesn't help. I think in that situation it's better to make some suggestions for securing it the best one can. I'm still certain that an XP box with LUA & SRP, DEP and EMET, unnecessary services turned off and a good HIPS like Comodo Firewall with the settings cranked up will be safer than a Win 7 running as admin by someone who doesn't have a clue.

 

Mitigating factor apply for privilege escalation vulnerabilities, not for remote code execution.

 

ariva free recently, it runs five programes, and all together used 40mb working set in idle, and 290mb private bytes.

i don't know how many avast! free use.

 

=

.............

 

see post #22

 

Avira V14 is very light indeed on my Windows 8 machine, see screenshot. I have 3 old notebooks with XP and 1GB of RAM, and when I had the full installation of Avira there was a definite impact in their performance.

Browsing with Chrome and Avira's full installation would easily hit 700 MB of RAM. Theoretically it should be okay, in practice I always experienced a slowdown as RAM memory tends to build up after a while. My solution was to rely on Sandboxie and keep Avira and MBAM on demand. I think nowadays, even with 32 bit computers, 2 GB of RAM is the minimum requirement.

 

yes he test 2013 version, my is 2014, and it is indeed more lighter.

his test avira has 6 processes, but i think avscan.exe should not be there, if it is idle.

 

I mentioned that:
17. Avira Free Antivirus 13.0.0.3499
1. Avast! Free Antivirus 8.0.1483

One more performance test for 2013 versions:
http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php?chart=chart4&year=2013&month=5&sort=1

-----------------------------------
p.s. In terms of performance, I don't believe that differences between versions 2013/2014 can be so dramatically different.