AV dilenma

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by node, Aug 13, 2003.

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

    node Guest

    Hi guys,

    Been trialing kav for about a month now. It does have aa slight performance hit. I do like it a lot but are there better solutions?

    A combination I'm thinking of are Nod32/TrojanHunter or TDS.

    Which setup would provide me better protection? Which setup would take more resource?
  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Nov 22, 2002
    Christchurch, UK
    I think a lot depends upon YOUR particular system;

    But here are some observations on using NOD( versions 1 and 2) for over 2 years and AVP(KAV) for nearly 5.

    1. KAV now can be tweaked so that the Monitor on most NEW computers shows hardly any slowdown, particularly with the new version 4.5;


    And overall KAV is the best overall detector of viruses AND trojans. At the present time I use KAV Personal on a Pentium IV laptop, 3.06 GHz, 1GB RAM and obviously there is no performance hit here.

    However, I have other much older machines, where it does drag down performance so I use other AV programs here.

    2. I was lucky enough to win a free copy of NOD v2 from Wilders which I have installed quite happily on a lowly Pentium II, Win 2000, 192MB Ram and it is flying on this box. So it has taken over from AVP 3.5, as my Primary Scanner here. Therefore, on a newer system NOD would not be noticeable. Therefore AMON on my older computers seems a lot lighter on resources than the AVP/KAV Monitor.

    In addition, NOD has a lightning fast scanner and may have better ITW virus detection and, if the current worm outbreak is an example, may be slightly faster in getting out the new virus definitions. On the other hand, it has an inferior unpacking engine and therefore trojan detection compared to KAV.

    Therefore, if a good AT program is added to NOD, the overall protective abilities should be fairly even, and I would think that the hit on resources, particularly on Win 2000/XP systems should again be comparable to KAV by itself. Although if TDS is your choice of AT and is set to run in the background there may be more of a drain on resources, particularly on older systems.

    Really the choice comes down to you. Which setup do you like and in particular what effect the setup has on your system. In my experience, AMON may be more sensitive to other programs than the running KAV Monitor, but again this is only my observation. For example, on my systems AMON and BOClean are not very compatible and therefore when using NOD I am using TDS as my AT and only as an on- demand backup scanner.

    I am sure that whatever of the 2 setups you choose you will be well protected against viruses and trojans.

    But maybe you do not have to choose!

    The other possibility is to use both of these top notch programs; one as your primary AV and the other as a backup scanner and therefore you have no dilemma ;).

    The other possibilty would be for Eset and Kaspersky to join forces to create a super AV program. Then there would be no discussion on the best AV setup :D.
  3. Paul Wilders

    Paul Wilders Administrator

    Jul 1, 2001
    The Netherlands
    In addition:

    Layered defense has always been my adagium ;).


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.