avast performance tweaks

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by treehouse786, Apr 18, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. treehouse786

    treehouse786 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Posts:
    1,388
    Location:
    Lancashire
    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
     
  2. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    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.
     
  3. Kyle1420

    Kyle1420 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Posts:
    479
    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 :p

    Honestly though, I wouldn't worry about it :)
     
  4. DBone

    DBone Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Posts:
    1,041
    Location:
    SoCal USA
    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.:eek: It's almost invisible on my machine, and the protection is well above average for a free or paid product.
     
  5. kikesan

    kikesan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Posts:
    13
    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.
     
  6. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    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 :shifty:
     
  7. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    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.
     
  8. infini

    infini Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2002
    Posts:
    110
    The mail shield is for web based mail such as gmail or for outlook?
     
  9. gery

    gery Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Posts:
    1,785
    no it is not for web mail . as far as i know.
     
  10. iravgupta

    iravgupta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Posts:
    605
    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.
     
  11. bollity

    bollity Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Posts:
    179
    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.
     
  12. Sherlock_Holmes

    Sherlock_Holmes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Posts:
    1,448
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Yea maybe thats why its giving a hard time to all paid av's
     
  13. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    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
     
  14. jasonbourne

    jasonbourne Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Posts:
    247
    --Definitely I'd go with J_L's.

    --Installing what you do not need is just a waste there.
     
  15. Kyle1420

    Kyle1420 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Posts:
    479
    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.
     
  16. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    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
     
  17. Matthijs5nl

    Matthijs5nl Guest

    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.
     
  18. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    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.
     
  19. Trooper

    Trooper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Posts:
    2,825
    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.
     
  20. toxinon12345

    toxinon12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Posts:
    1,200
    Location:
    Managua, Nicaragua
    The only thing I install is the IPS Behavior Blocker, but I have to replace with other soon :)
     
  21. xandros

    xandros Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    Posts:
    411
    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
     
  22. ichito

    ichito Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Posts:
    1,485
    Location:
    Poland - Cracow
    Yes...it's a basic and very useful setup...thanks RejZoR :) My Avast works without only P2P Shield an IM Shield.
     
  23. Brandonn2010

    Brandonn2010 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Posts:
    1,849
    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?
     
  24. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    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.
     
  25. Brandonn2010

    Brandonn2010 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Posts:
    1,849
    Does Vlk check this forum, or should it be asked on the Avast! forum?
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.