avast performance tweaks

i have recently switched to avast as my main av as prevx was actually slowing down my pc when opening certain programs (avast is extremely light by the way).

i am happy with how avast is performing but are there any tweaks i can do to make it even faster? i am a very careful user so default is slightly overkill for me.

thanks

 

Don't install shield or features that you don't need (ex: Mail, IM, P2P, etc).
Never use scan all files. Add exclusions to your other security programs. Always enable cache. Don't change packers. Never test whole files.

That's all I know.

 

That may be the total opposite of what he needs!
Installing those extra shields, He can E.G. put max settings on certain area's of his system such as threat gates, While lowering the impact on real-time by reducing "system shield"settings

Honestly though, I wouldn't worry about it

 

I did a custom install, and I chose to not install the P2P, IM, Mail and Script Shields. Also, I did not install the Gadget either. J_L had some good advice too.

I have been running avast! Free 6.0 since it was in beta, and I haven't had a single urge to try another AV, which is really saying something for me. It's almost invisible on my machine, and the protection is well above average for a free or paid product.

 

As others had said, I wouldn't install Shields that won't be used such as P2P or Mail Shield. I have a PC with Avast! installed and there's pretty light. In settings I have just enabled heuristics to maximum level.

 

Just curious.

Is there a big differens in performance regarding wich shields one choose to install?

Like wich is the heaviest, lightest shield etc...

Just wondering incase i'm going to try out Avast at some point

 

If you're planning on trimming down the File System Shield, it's recommended to use all other shields that might cover other areas. File System Shield is probably really the most demanding as it's constantly accessing the HDD, but if you trim it down a bit and let the Web Shieled, P2P Shield and IM Shield do the work, then use them. These only access HDD when relevant data hits the HDD. Sure they use some memory but the difference is really so minimal i don't think anyone would notice it even with a memory monitoring program.

 

The mail shield is for web based mail such as gmail or for outlook?

 

no it is not for web mail . as far as i know.

 

Correct. The mail shield is for Email Clients like Outlook, Outlook Express, Windows Mail, Windows Live Mail, Thunderbird etc. Web based email is secured by web-shield.

 

instant message shield, network shield, mail shield lol @ avast . i think avast adds so many useless shields to convince users that avast is full of features more than any other antivirus. avast thinks that computers still have floppy drives. sorry avast users but avast is a kids toy and not professional.

 

Yea maybe thats why its giving a hard time to all paid av's

 

Bare bottem setup of Avast free
- file shield on standard (with its caching it is really light and it is the back bone of any Anti Virus)
- Sandbox on auto

 

--Definitely I'd go with J_L's.

--Installing what you do not need is just a waste there.

 

I keep saying it.... ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Avast mail shield is not client dependant(outlook, thunderbird)
"malware" does not require an email client if it wanted to spam email\anything.

Example;
One time I was playing around programming making a simple email sender with python, When I sent the email... avast alerted me.
I did not have outlook,thunderbird, anything on my pc.


pls Do research before suggesting...(especially security)



@jasonbourne, Pls read the rest of my comment you replied to..

Meaning that for example, You could put max sensitivity on the webshield and lowering the realtime shield, Which would arguably achieve the same level of protection.

 

You don't seem to have enough knowledge to judge anything. If you think all shields are useless, so be it. But they are not and they in fact compliment each other.

> File System Shield - scans all files on-access, doesn't scan files inside archives for minimal performance impact but no less protection as well

> Web Shield - scans all files on HTTP protocol level, also scans files inside archives

> Mail Shield - scans POP3/IMAP/NNTP protocols (attachements), scans inside archives and provides special heuristics on a e-mail message structure level (double extensions, external suspicious links, suspicious HTML structure etc)

> IM Shield - scans files transfered through IM protocols, also scans inside archives (provides additional layer if File System Shield is disabled for whatever reason)

> P2P Shield - scans files transfered through P2P protocols, also scans inside archives (provides additional layer if File System Shield is disabled for whatever reason)

> Network Shield - scans and blocks malicious packets on TCP/IP protocol level (like those from Sasser or MSBlast) and now for a while also blocks malicious webpages on HTTP protocol level

> Script Shield - scans and analyzes executed scripts and follows their actions during script execution

> Behavior Shield - analyzes all actions of all applications being executing and running

If you can understand what i have written here you'll see that shields are no useless and there just to convience someone. They are there with purpose. Sure some aren't essential like IM and P2P Shields, but since they don't significantly add up to memory usage, using them all is highly recommended.
But there are other shields that even though they don't provide direct protection, they do offer indirect passive protection. Like Mail Shield. Even if you don't use POP3 or IMAP e-mail client, this shield provides addditional protection for possible mass mail worms. These aren't as common these days as they were before but still, the protection is there.

So bottom line, these shields are a must have (not using any of them will decrease protection significantly):
File System Shield
Web Shield
Network Shield
Script Shield
Behavior Shield

Optional but highly recommended shield is:
Mail Shield

Optional shields are:
P2P Shield
IM Shield

 

Nice overview RejZoR, I also have some questions.

What determines the decision for avast! to ask for autosandboxing?
I think vlk once said the decision to autosandbox was based on three items:
1. community data (CommunityIQ);
2. heuristics;
3. behavioral characteristics as classified by the behavior shield.
But how does it work exactly?

So if one would decide not to install the behavior shield, would that cripple the capabilities of avast! to decide whether a program should be autosandboxed?
Since I can understand that people might not install the behavior shield since no one actually saw it jumping into action.

 

Trust me, i've seen Behavior Shield detecting stuff. It was really not detecting anything back in the avast! 5.0 stage (well it did but mostly limited to kernel level rootkits) but now with version 6.x, Behavior Shield in fact does work. Maybe still not at ful extent but it does work and i have seen it on live samples.

As for the Auto Sandboxing, i really can't say with 100% certainty how it works if you don't install Behavior Shield.

I know that it will always use code emulation (basically a virtual machine) to analyze since it's a part of a primary shield (File System Shield). CommunityIQ is also involved which you cannot remove. It also analyzes other file characteristics that aren't really bound to any other shield. Honestly i think they aren't that stupid and that required behavior analyzing features are available to the Auto Sandbox feature even if you don't install Behavior Shield. But i think only Vlk can answer you that with an exact answer. But it would make the most sense that way.

 

I run all shields on my computer and its fine. No slowdowns or anything. The only thing I don't install is the web shield (or guard) cant remember what its called. That did slow down browsing but with all the other shields enabled, my machine is running like a champ.

So basically, I agree and concur with what RejZoR posted.

 

The only thing I install is the IPS Behavior Blocker, but I have to replace with other soon

 

i think avast free antivirus light and very fast when scan the computer
when i use it i dont feel that i have antivirus in my computer its really light

 

Yes...it's a basic and very useful setup...thanks RejZoR My Avast works without only P2P Shield an IM Shield.

 

Quick question about the persistent caching:

Quick scan has the speed up by using persistent caching checked, but not store data, and full scan is the opposite, with only store data checked. Should both be checked for quick and full scanning or what?

 

I usually check them both so it's sort of get an optimal balance where it speeds up a bit by skipping certain stuff but still stores new files in the cache which may give some performance hit.
Quick scan has storing disabled because of the raw speed, Full scan has cache disabled probably because of thoroughness. Though it shouldn't be any less secure if enabled so i don't exactly understand the decision there.
Maybe Vlk could shed some light on that.

 

Does Vlk check this forum, or should it be asked on the Avast! forum?