Antivirus Software with lowest impact on system resources

According to this article at PC World, http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,130869/article.html, AVG antivirus, NOD 32, Panda and Avast cause the lowest system slowdown, AVG causing only a 2% hit. They don't reveal how they came about these results. In your experience, which of the relatively major antivirus packages has had the least impact on your system performance during your routine work? (As in, not while performing a thorough/full scan, but while the antivirus program runs in the background and actively protects through whatever method.)

 

i think NOD32 2.x,AVIRA

 

kaspersky internet security
take look https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=187525



good luck

 

Everyone will have a different experience with this since all computers are different in how they react to different software. But my experience on this computer running Vista Home Premium runs extremely well with either Norton Antivirus with antispyware 2008 and also McAfee Antivirus with Antispyware2008. I have tried several others but these two are the ones my computer likes. currently running Norton Av with As 2008. I am curious to see what others here have to say.

 

Avira, NOD32 v2.x, and AVG.

 

The best way to view the results is to select several or all checkboxes and then generate a comparison chart. The results show some significant speed differences between the programs.

edit:
For example, go to this chart and scroll down to the "System Slowdown with Firefox 2" row:

http://www.pcworld.com/product/test...29896&prodid=29898&prodid=29900&prodid=29901#

 

definitely nod32 and avira

 

F-PROT

 

NOD32 all the way. I dont even know its running.

 

Another vote for F-Prot.

 

okay i ran nod, avira, kis, f-secure and many many others.. i am running kis now and i see almost no difference. most say its bogs things down i dont see it.. and as far as ram usage kis uses even less ram than avira or ess did on my machines

 

For me personally, F-Prot, Avira, Norton 2008 AV, and NOD32 (in no particular order). Of course, you still should try each on your systems.

 

NOD32, Avira

 

also notice they are comparing kis6 not kis7 there

 

http://www.pcworld.com/product/test...=30867&prodid=30870&prodid=30873&prodid=30829

more current in this one it actually shows kis7 to have the slowest transfer rate for files.. i do not see this impact myself though..

 

In order i'd say:
Avg, Avast, Avira, Nod32

 

The thread is about anti virus. Not security suites. Stand alones are always better then all in ones.

 

Dr.Web is extremely light. Small updates, small installation, compact virus database, low memory usage. I have around 6-9 mb of memory usage with realtime scanner taking 2mb. CPU usage is also small with realtime monitor, never even have seen it "hog" total cpu usage.

 

I really honestly tested a lot.
But still KIS 7 is the lightest for me. I can't even feel it is here. Also download rate is great.

beautiful part is that v8 will even be more light

 

Thats one reason I keep running AVG-it may not have the absolute best detections,but its so light and friendly,puts some of the others to shame.

 

IME, with default settings, Avira, CSAV, Dr Web and NOD.

You can add VBA32 to this group once you tweak it to process only new files.

 

Lightest I've ever used is without a doubt NOD32 2.x , however it's painfully slow at scanning packed exes. So much that it freezes your comp while scanning them.

 

I've run McAfee Antivirus and it ran very light on my computer. There are some things I don't like about McAfee, but I find that with just about every AV I've tried.
As for NAV. For some reason my computer doesn't like NAV, or the other way around. It took forever to load at startup.

 

KIS all the way.... used only 7MB of my RAM!

see post #35 ..... https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=191053&page=2

 

On all counts, by far drweb.

Low memory usage
boot times
general pc usage
database size
Size of downloaded updates

I could keep going on, but you get the jist