DRWEB vs. NOD32...My conclusion.

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Barney, Sep 24, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. shorty1

    shorty1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Posts:
    97
    Location:
    Vermont
    Yes, please see the thread Technodrome linked to above. Appearances can be deceiving and I've tried to explain the memory usage situation with Dr Web several times but never with pictures... :p
    Look at the Virtual Memory column before running the scanner and after. You will see it doesn't change except for a few minor flucations in some processes which is perfectly normal. Again, Virtual Memory is the true indicator of memory usage so this is what one needs to be concerned with.
    Further, it is the memory scan in Dr Web scanner that causes the memory usage column in task manager to go crazy. I'm not recommending it but if you you uncheck "memory scan" in the scanner settings you won't see this behavior.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,024
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Just booted up my desktop system;

    1. Using Faber Toys dependencies, Dr Web is showing the two spidernt.exe processes. One is the AV-service using 1004KB and the second, concerned with the GUI agent application is using 1.58MB memory. This memory usage is for a custom install of Dr Web with just the SpiderGuard and the scanner installed. So no evidence of high memory usage here.

    2. With Windows Task Manager, again there is no evidence of high usage, either under peak memory usage or with Virtual memory Size.

    Therefore as Technodrome has pointed out, your extraordinary memory usage readings are an anomoly of the scanner. The true memory usage is given by your virtual memory figures.
    A little hasty in our conclusion of Dr Web as a low footprint AV?
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Nov 15, 2004
  3. shorty1

    shorty1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Posts:
    97
    Location:
    Vermont
    and after running Dr Web scanner.....
     

    Attached Files:

  4. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii

    You hit the nail on the head. I had just completed a manual scan when I looked at task manager and saw all the memory usage. I have the column for virtual memory enabled in Task Manager but I didn't pay attention to it for Dr.Web. I have XP Pro Sp1a. I rebooted twice this morning and noticed the resource usage for Dr. Web was way down to 9MB.

    All this is moot though. I just uninstalled it. It slows my computer too much. It is the only AV that has done that. KAV 4.5 had no effect on the computer with everything checked to be scanned in RT. You check Dr.Web to do that and there goes a very fast Dell Dimension 8300 at 3GHz with 1024RAM. Might as well be using my old W98SE box. :(

    Plus, I cannot abide by an AV that has basically NO help file especially when I hear the email support is awful. I could handle bad email support but not no help file. Even if Dr.Web had not reduced my computer to crawl, I would not use it without a decent help file. It really slowed my boot time! Plus, who wants an AV that you have to reboot when you change something? I mean that is one reason for having XP so you don't need to reboot for weeks (unless you are making lots of changes in things like I have been doing recently).

    Needless to say, I was not impressed. I'd take most AVs over Dr.Web. Because there was no help file, I clicked on something in Dr.Web trying to see what it did since I couldn't read about it in the help file and the computer shut down and I lost some work. I have no patience for software that doesn't provide a help file unless the software is free.
     
  5. Barney

    Barney Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Posts:
    120
    Guess what everybody. I am having slight problems with DRWEB again. For some weird reason, my computer is spontaneously rebooting just after I enter my login password. The only way I can successfully log into windows is to set Spidernt.exe to "manual", then start DRWEB after I've logged in. I may have to make the plunge and reinstall windows, but I don't want to do that unless I absolutely have to. I wasn't having this problem at all with Version 4.32a. I am running BOCLEAN, VCOOL, Process Guard, Admuncher and Looknstop. These programs have never caused problem in the past, so they are probably not culprit. If anybody has a solution, please let me know. Thanks.
     
  6. no13

    no13 Retired Major Resident Nutcase

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Wouldn't YOU like to know?
    Two short questions (no pun intended)
    @Blackcat...
    Could you show us the usage of ewidoguard.exe ;)
    @Shorty...
    Did you use firefox for at least half an hour, 3+ tabs? (that sends my firefox to 22M, virtual: 35M)
     
  7. Barney

    Barney Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Posts:
    120
    Hello everybody, I was just curious on which antivirus has better heuristics/detection rate: DRWEB or NOD32. I have used both and tend to lean toward DRWEB. It's amazing what this little 5MB program is capable of. It has caught malware that no other antivirus' are capable of. Give me some feedback on this. Thanks.

    Barney
     
  8. shorty1

    shorty1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Posts:
    97
    Location:
    Vermont
    Not sure what the status was at the time of that screenshot -- other then it was minimized and that is why the memory usage column is so low. Also, for the next name change I wish to suggest FirePig! oink! :D
    I like the program but it sure likes to eat.
     
  9. ......

    ...... Guest

    Anyone else noticed slowness with the doc when set to scan files that are created/ written AND accessed in realtime? Especially when viewing files via explorer with lots of "packed" .exe's. "Smart" scanning on the other hand doesnt produce this negetive results, however i do not feel comfortable with "smart scanning"

    Thanks for any input
     
  10. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Sure. I saw that. I don't understand all this praise of Dr.Web. I thought it was the worst av I have tried and I have tried the vast majority. It brought my computer to a halt when I set it to scan all files in real time. No other AV has ever managed to do that! NOD32 slows this box with the current version if the HTTP scanner is used but KAV 4.5 doesn't slow it at all with everything set to max. Dr. Web is a very poor av unless you use smart scan which I would never do.
     
  11. shorty1

    shorty1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Posts:
    97
    Location:
    Vermont
    Yes, there is significant slow down when SpiDer is set to scan on "run and open" and"create and write" You can improve SpiDer Guard performance (at the expense of using more memory) by increasing the "recent files" list to 1000. Right-click SpiDer Guard>> Control>>Options
    Recent file list -- default setting is 100. I suggest you try between 500 and 1000. I've only played with it a tiny bit and it does help, but I didn't see miracles. :p
    Personally, I prefer "smart" mode and I feel that I'm quite safe as long as full scans are regularly conducted. Would welcome disscussion or reasoning to the contrary, though.
     
  12. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    No detectable slowdown here using the NOD HTTP scanner on a 2.8GhZ/1024 machine and cable connection.

    As with any AV the results may be different for a specific platform, applications loaded, type of connection, etc..
     
  13. no13

    no13 Retired Major Resident Nutcase

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Wouldn't YOU like to know?
    Maybe u guys are running an app that make Dr Web slow down...
    SpySweeper does that to Kav sometimes... to the point of a hang-up!
     
  14. bellgamin

    bellgamin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    8,102
    Location:
    Hawaii
    *Certain* folks have tried just about every major AV, including my beloved green spider DRW, & have had plenty bad schtuff to say about all of them. Doesn't bother me. Those folks seem to keep things rather spiced up -- like whipped cream on one's raw oysters, wot?

    Still, I sometimes wonder -- since *certain* folks have found nothing good to say about ANY AV they have ever written about -- what in the world AV do they actually use? :D
     
  15. Benvan45

    Benvan45 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Posts:
    556
    Very wise words indeed and I wish I siad that.........

    Greetings,

    Putin
     
  16. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    I don't know if that comment was intended for me or not. But I have say I'm glad that I'm not using F-Prot which is the one I have liked best. If I was, I would have a major mess on my hands since it is flagging all java files as being viruses and deleting them without warning.
    http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,11881163~mode=flat

    I'm beginning to think safe hex and no av is the best way to go. ;)
     
  17. fredra

    fredra Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2004
    Posts:
    366
    Amen to that statement :D
    Cheers :)
     
  18. ......

    ...... Guest

    Makes no difference to the speed unfortunatly :( . Guess ill go back to NOD32.
    About "smart" scanning. I would prefer the virus never to touch my pc, opposed to deleting it after its been on the system... just me though.
    Thanks for the suggestion though :)

    bellgamin, although in a way i agree with you, however people find fualts with everything... nothing on earth is perfect! (except me of course...), therfore people settle with a certain product (then way they find best).
     
  19. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,024
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    This is the old chestnut, that in some circumstances, executables may not be checked when SpiderGuard is in smart mode.

    Because of the performance hit, most people have to run Spiderguard in this mode. However, several other AV's, including NAV, RAV, AVK and F-Secure for example, bring most systems to their knees if ALL files are selected in the RTM.

    Generally, "smart mode" is recommended on a clean PC after you have run the on-demand scanner and scanned the whole hard disk(s) of your computer. After this check, "smart mode" is really a good selection as it is quick and reliable. In fact, "SM" is a combination of "Run and open" and "Create and write" but it does not check files on local disks.

    As far as my personal settings are concerned, I use only the SM, and I launch occasionally the Dr.Web scanner - just to check the memory and processes running in memory.

    Checking "Run and open" & "Create and write" is probably the best protective solution but this will lead to a considerable slowdown of your PC.

    However, only a little extra care and safe-hex is needed when using Dr Web in smart mode;

    1. Carry out regular scans using the on-demand scanner.

    2. Right-click and scan on each new file that has been downloaded or about to be installed on your system.

    These extra precautions, which should be used with all AV's, will ensure SpiderGuard even in smart mode will offer an excellent balance between protection and performance for most systems.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2004
  20. TAG97

    TAG97 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Posts:
    616
    Location:
    Connecticut USA
    Agree 100%
    Should be in DrWeb's skimpy Help File ;)
     
  21. bellgamin

    bellgamin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    8,102
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Skimpy?!! Non-existent is closer to the reality. :D

    For me, DRW's *Help File* is Wilder's. I am very grateful to ALL of you.
     
  22. Barney

    Barney Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Posts:
    120
    I second that. If you want DRWEB advice, this is the place to come. It's the place to come for any antivirus advice for that matter. I wonder if DRWEB ever has any intention of changing their interface. It does an excellent job, but a new look would be a nice change. I remember the change from Nod V.1 to Nod V.2.....that was a huge interface change. I think it would be cool as hell if the user had the option to select the old style pulsating heart on AMON.

    Barney
     
  23. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Is that what that repulsive glob was supposed to be? A heart? :rolleyes: It looked more like an alien monster. I hated that thing. I would have gotten NOD32 long before I actually did if it hadn't had that ugly, malignant thing that I was forced to look at. :p
     
  24. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    My wife still uses NOD32 v1 on her laptop. That pulsing "thing" is still cool. :D


    tECHNODROME
     

    Attached Files:

  25. Barney

    Barney Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Posts:
    120
    Is it still possible to use current signature files with version 1. I thought that it was no longer possible to update version1.

    Barney
     
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.