AVK 2005 vs Nod32

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by sinbad370, Apr 9, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sinbad370

    sinbad370 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    Posts:
    68
    Location:
    Georgia
    Between nod32(beta) and gdata AVK 2005 , witch AV gives my (p3 851ram xp pro –patched) better all around protection; and do they have a similar memory foot-print. Memory usage is important.
     
  2. Hartigan

    Hartigan Guest

    I can vouch that NOD32 is light on resources.
    The kernal driver process has never peaked over 20MB for me. :)
     
  3. dan_maran

    dan_maran Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Posts:
    1,053
    Location:
    Stamford, CT
    There are a few threads on GData AVK 2005 here @ wilders, but to answer your question about memory AVK uses approx 27MB Virt. 20MB Phys. But the systems I have tested it on have not been slowed at all, no noticable drag even for the 27MB.

    Here is a search for GData
     
  4. jlo

    jlo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Posts:
    475
    Location:
    UK
    Hi,

    I have not tried Gdata but think it is the best in detection due to the KAV engine. The bitdefender engine is quite hot on Heuristics as well. Very regular updates.

    However I am a registered user of Nod32 which is very light, has superiour Heuristics (Will detect most new e mail worms with out sig) although is below outright defs detecion when compared with Gdata and does not update so often.

    Both are good products that I am sure will serve you well.

    Cheers

    Jlo
     
  5. Howard

    Howard Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Posts:
    313
    Location:
    Wales, UK
    I am a registered user of both these programmes. Both, I believe, are very good. AVK uses more than twice the memory of NOD32 here (XP Pro SP2) and has a much more noticeable impact on performance (I don't actually notice any performance impact with NOD32). AVK uses the KAV, as well as the BitDefender engine, which probably gives it the edge over NOD32.

    I prefer to use NOD32 2.5 beta, rather than AVK 2005, in combination with BOClean, but I don't think you can go wrong with either of these programmes, as long as you have plenty of memory (for AVK).
     
  6. tazdevl

    tazdevl Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Posts:
    837
    Location:
    AZ, USA
    Well said and I concur. However the system impact is more a function of the CPU & system throughput with AVK rather than memory (unless you're running 128MB) because you're running 2 engines.

    If you want the best protection and system impact isn't a concern, get AVK. A couple things to keep in mind though is that GDATA's service/support leaves something to be desired, it's pretty inconsistent. Also, even though it has dual engines, in most cases it's detection rates are the exact same as KAV's and in the past has yielded more FPs. So the benefit of the dual engine is still up in the air.

    If you want nearly as good protection with minimal system impact, get NOD32.

    I have licenses for both and ended up with NOD32 and BOClean.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2005
  7. sinbad370

    sinbad370 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    Posts:
    68
    Location:
    Georgia
    I am leaning toward using

    1) Nod32 2.5 RTM.
    2) Ewido 3.0 RTM
    3) Gdata AVK 2005 as a daily scheduled scan. On demand.
    4) Looknstop maybe outpost as firewall.
    Any comments are welcomed. I think this may give me decent protection with a lite foot print.
     
  8. tazdevl

    tazdevl Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Posts:
    837
    Location:
    AZ, USA
    Bit overboard IMO if you follow up with AVK as an OD, I'd just use a free online scanner. If you have excessively risky habits, makes sense otherwise you should be just fine with NOD32 and Ewido.

    I have a license for Outpost and ZoneAlarm. Look n Stop seems like too much work. Ended up just going with ZA for simplicity's sake.

    It's pretty easy to go overboard on security. Just look at your habits and what your objectives are, then buy the appropriate products.
     
  9. Mele20

    Mele20 Former Poster

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Posts:
    2,495
    Location:
    Hilo, Hawaii
    I agree with your last statement. I have been using Bit Defender free for about six months. It's excellent and all I need is an on demand scanner. If my habits change though, then I will likely need a resident scanner. You really do need to assess your habits and act accordingly. Most people over react and get too much security even though their habits do not put them in the high risk category. It is not those who frequent forums such as this one but the total dummies who need tons of protection. Ironically those who need security products the most generally don't have any at all (or don't keep up to date and properly configured what they have) and those who need it the least have way too much security.
     
  10. Defenestration

    Defenestration Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2004
    Posts:
    1,086
    Re. your firewall, I think LooknStop is a great choice. Lowest resource use and extremely high protection. Even more so if you use the beta drivers (which I have been running for several months now with no problems). I currently use it with Phant0m's rule set, although the Enhanced Rule set is nearly as good.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.