Confused about Free Avira Antvir and Free Avast

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by ohblu, Jul 26, 2008.

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

    ohblu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Posts:
    79
    Location:
    Colorado
    I need to find another antivirus software and I was thinking of either Avira Free or Avast Free.

    Unfortunately I'm a little confused about something.

    I was told that Avira uses less system resources than Avast. But I don't see how. For XP, Avira requires 192 MB RAM and Avast requires 64 MB but 128 are recommended. So wouldn't that mean Avast uses less resources? Or am I completely misunderstanding this? If I am, please explain.

    Also, I thought Avira required a lot less than 192 MB RAM. One of the download sites linked off the Avira site say it requires 20 MB RAM. What's up with that?
     
  2. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    Those are HW requirements (a.k.a. minimal HW specifications, not really important since OS requirements are generally way above those for modern Windows-based OS if they are supposed to be reasonably usable). IOW, they are not a description of how much RAM the SW uses. Avira definitely doesn't use 192MB of RAM, otherwise I'd get rid of it very fast. :blink:
     
  3. eBBox

    eBBox Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Posts:
    482
    Location:
    Aalborg, Denmark
    Dont mix min. ram required and ram usage and harddisk space... As said before min ram required has nothing to to with how much it uses. Maby some of the userers in here using these products can enlighten you with the numbers on their computers (which can differ from on your computer).

    The best thing is to install both products and see what runs best on your computer. A product that uses etc 40 mb ram can be running lighter than a product that uses 25 :) Not always a logic in that.

    Test them both and youll find out what runs best :thumb:
    (IMO they run eaqually good on the machines i've been testing, but I prefer Avast!)
     
  4. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    +1 on this... Low RAM usage means nothing if the realtime AV scanner itself has 30%+ payload on CPU slowing down everything to a crawl even on quad-core box (greetings to Symantec :thumbd: o_O )
     
  5. ola nordmann

    ola nordmann Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Posts:
    89
    Avira runs very light, and has 3 processes with a very low combined memory usage (look at "Working Set" for the outlined processes, which equals memory usage in Windows' built-in taskmanager). It's less than 10MB in total, and is therefor lighter than even so-called light AVs like Dr.Web etc.

    http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/1962/clipboard01rl0.png

    This system only has 384MB, which is very little in today's standards, but still runs pretty well because of Avira. The problem is not Avira but the memory usage of Windows itself + all the other running programs you may have on your system :)


    EDIT: I forgot, Avira also has 2 drivers loaded (avgio.sys & avgntflt.sys) that doesn't show up in task managers, but combined they are only ~60kB.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2008
  6. Tarq57

    Tarq57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Posts:
    966
    Location:
    Wellington NZ
    While I don't disagree at all with this, I'd just like to clarify that what is intended is to try them each in turn.
    Don't try to install both together.
    Give them a few days each, or as long as it takes for you to get familiar with the programs, check the scanning, updates etc.
    They're both good. Which one you choose will depend on your preference (of course) and the way each program runs on your computer.
     
  7. Diver

    Diver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,444
    Location:
    Deep Underwater
    Ran both Avira and Avast on my system and Avast produced a lower Commit Charge or lower memory usage. That said both are pretty light and you should try both before you decide.
     
  8. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,727
    Location:
    Texas
    Closed per Policy.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.