A question about Dr. Web

Maybe Chris can help here. Why does a system scan take so long with Dr. Web yet SpIDer Guard seems to run very light and quick with normal PC operation?

I am looking for a light AV for a gaming machine and first impressions are Dr. Web is a good candidate. Just a little confused as to the scanning speed....

 

Files within archives(.rar, .zip, etc.)are scanned in a full system scan, which spider guard does not do by default. I believe the "smart" mode which is default, scans only if a file is modified or started/accessed .. and therefore it performs better but does not compromise security.

 

Kielty,

Drweb takes for ever to do a full scan.It is known to be very slow.

If scan speed bothers you I suggest you look elsewhere.

 

sure, people will recommend you something else, this is the nature of a forum, but try not to listen too much.

regarding Drweb, i believe the scanning speed can still be improved, but drweb supports a massive load of packers etc so scanning takes a little longer.

4.44 has included even more in its scan, yet the scan time has stayed a similar length of time, so 4.44 has improved its scanning speed.

Version 4.44 in particular is much faster at scanning CHM-files and certain types of installations compared to its 4.33 previous version.

scanners such as nod32 which is really fast, do not scan so much in comparison.

but yes, i believe drweb can still improve this further, and i hope they will do.

if your looking for a light AV for gaming, then look no futher

migrate and get your 50% discount, or even if you hold no other AV licence for a different antivirus, apply for the 15% discount, id personally recommend the 2year migration, its a very good deal.

if you are liking the trial, as it sounds like you are.... dont resist

yep, i agree... the guard is ultra fast, hats off to serge here.

Version 4.44 has the following enhancements:
- Full support of Windows Vista;
- 'Curing' a system from rootkits;
- New non-signature unknown virus detection technology (origin);
- Optimized engine that quickly scans;
- Support for even more archivers and packers.

and according to anti-malware.ru, removal of threats is pretty good too compared to the last version.

any more questions, dont be shy to send me a PM Kielty.

 

If you look for a light av, then definitely trial avira.I trialed it and it is much lighter than drweb.


More info here http://www.av-comparatives.org

 

That is just not true. Even if you were to use SpiderMail, which I don't, Dr Web would still be the lightest AV ever, both in terms of memory and CPU.

 

dont feed the trolls.

 

N8chavez,

Ok.I should have said " I trialed it and on my pc avira is faster and lighter".

E

 

Now I'm confused. There is a difference between an AV being 'lighter' and an AV being 'faster,' especially when you don't know what we are takling about; on-access or on-demand. Dr Web's on-access scanner did once have issues but as far as I can tell they have been fixed in 4.44. The on-demand scanner is slow. But does that matter? How often does that need to run?

 

I forgot to add "lighter". I edited it. I hope it is ok and it is not too late n8chavez ?

 

banshee, do me a favor, I deleted my posts about Avira, please do the same as this really is a Dr Web thread and we are only going to cause it to get closed. And that isnt right, you know.

 

Actualy, I'm not sure that this discussion is really off-topic. Kielty is looking for a 'light' AV, so I think that this could be a very good discussion, as long as we don't resort to personal attacks. Differences in opinion are going to happen, and, there's no real way to say what will happen on every system.

 

I read it differently.

 

I'll agree Kielty did say "looking for a 'light' AV" but if taken as a whole of what was written....the jest of this thread concerns Dr. Webs scanning speed.

This is not and simply can not be a thread about "a 'light' AV" as per our General Policy for this Forum. The thread discussion is about Dr. Web and the meat of the discussion concerns whats asked in post #1.

Bubba

 

kielty - you may be interested in this thread discussing dr. web's scan speed

 

Thanks for all the replies. Intresting that Dr. Web takes so long on a scan - i now understand why. Realisically how often is a full scan required...

I have got to say running day to day with the SpIder guard it does not slow down my pc at all. I have tried NOD32, Avira and Dr. Web and i really cannot fault any of them. The real time scanning is exceptional in all cases and any of them are ideal for a gaming machine.

Decisions, decisions.....

 

Feel free to join in the thread posted above by WSFuser and I'm sure you'll find an answer there.

The trialing of AV's as you are doing is the only true way to determine if one is "ideal for a gaming machine".

So as not to have duplicate discussion about Dr. Web scan speeds....We will bring this thread to a close.

Bubba