F-PROT vs NOD32

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by SIMONxi, Feb 26, 2005.

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

    SIMONxi Guest

    Of the two powerboy lightweights, which do you prefer and why?
     
  2. .....

    ..... Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Posts:
    312
    NOD32, more configurable.

    F-Prot is slightly lighter however.
     
  3. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    F-Prot is very light and offers excellent protection and removal, F-Prot also has complete restoration of the system after virus has infected (which includes registry entries, system files, startup etc.)...others dont do complete restore (for eg. if virus decreased your IE security level other AVs will not change that).

    Of course, I could be wrong, but F-Prot is an excellent scanner.
     
  4. Technodrome

    Technodrome Security Expert

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Posts:
    2,140
    Location:
    New York
    Both products are very good.

    NOD32 offers more features and better heuristic. F-prot offers better ZOO virus coverage and simplicity. Try them both and see which one suite you better.


    tECHNODROME
     
  5. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    I agree with Technodrome.
     
  6. Mr2cents

    Mr2cents Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Posts:
    497
    I agree with Technodrome also. I've trialed both Nod32 and F-prot. I like Nod better. However, that's just my opinion. You should try them both out and see which is best suited for your needs.
     
  7. iwod

    iwod Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    708
    well, with version 3.16a i am not so sure if Fprot is still the lightest AV anymore. It kind of gives me the feeling of Old, but still trusted and working.

    Detection rate and cleaning is higher / better than NOD32. But update is sometime slow and NO AH compare to Nod.

    i am still waiting for fprot 4........... which was suppse to be out last year. much like tds 4..........
     
  8. hollywoodpc

    hollywoodpc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,325
    The weight of f-prot against the weight of NOD ? lol . Come on guys . Give this guy some helpful help . Talking about one being lighter than the other is like saying 5 inches is SOOOOO much longer than 4.90 inches . The weight should make difference , even on an old machine . They are both VERY light . So continue looking for something more than which one weighs more . The weight of each is so close to the other that it makes no difference . Good luck in your quest
     
  9. hollywoodpc

    hollywoodpc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,325
    Could you show me Or at least tell me where you gathered your info ? f-prot cleans better and detects better ? hmmmmmmm...........
     
  10. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    http://www.av-comparatives.org

    One site where F-Prot seems better than NOD32...see the On-Demand comparatives.
     
  11. hollywoodpc

    hollywoodpc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,325
    Hi . And this link tells me what ? That overall NOD IS better than f-prot in a zoo test ? Please . Bottom line is , they are both good . And a zoo test does not set the standard . You can find many sites that will show differences . This on happens to show that NOD is better long term . So what . VB shows NOD is better too . I believe NOD is better based on tests I have done in the past and detection rates overall . My point is simple . Choose one based on something other than weight because the weight of each are so close that they negate each other .
     
  12. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Yes. I only gave you the link for your information. That test shows that in overall malware dtection F-Prot is better...but then NOD32 has the excellent heuristics. Both products are great I completely agree...the only way is to try and find out.
     
  13. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    However, don't forget the proactive/retrospective test, also at http://www.av-comparatives.org. Here NOD32 leads the pack. Both styles of challenge test are relevant to typical usage. How does one comparatively weight the results? Good question, too bad there isn't a set answer.

    The other dimension to consider is relative noise contained in these types of challenge experiments. I tend to split the results into three rough tiers. From the latest demand test, McAfee and KAV are in the top tier (maybe Panda as well), a number including NOD32 are in the second tier, and there are a few stragglers in the final tier of those tested. Now, all of the programs tested perform very well in the field, we're discussing minor detection differences among a strong group of offerings. Every program tested in that work is perfectly suitable for general consumer usage.

    Blue
     
  14. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Thas what I want to say, Blue...the only way is to trial and find out!
     
  15. hollywoodpc

    hollywoodpc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,325
    Firecat .
    We have to stop meeting like this . lol . Keep in mind , the cmparatives are on a SP1 . Plus , if you look closely , NOD performs better as time goes on . Why ? Because their team is constantly raising the bar . f- prot will catch up but , NOD will have raised the bar again . f-prot plays catchup to the biggies . look at KAV . f-prot used to , at least , use that engine . SO WHAT . The updates came much later than KAV . So ...... KAV is better though the engines were the same . NOD is better even in the link you show . Long term you can see how they continue to excel . F-prot still lags . Both are good . NOD is the safer bet . No question . And thank you for the info my friend .
     
  16. tsehov

    tsehov Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Posts:
    17
  17. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Thank you too...I know that NOD is improving rapidly for Trojan detection...I remember the addition of 1000 signatures with an update!

    But did f-prot really use that engine?

    I do not doubt NOD is better. Any idea on whether NOD will detect Adware/Spyware...I am keeping a close eye on it, I want to buy a new AV, mine will expire on May you see.

    I think F-Prot detects certain Adware/Spyware thats why overall detection is slightly better than NOD...but NOD is better for viruses and AH is the wave of the future.

    Regards,
    Firecat
     
  18. hollywoodpc

    hollywoodpc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,325
  19. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    I also don't put faith in that because

    1)It is of August 2004 and NOD has tremendously improved their signature definitions since then.
    2)NOD version is older.
     
  20. hollywoodpc

    hollywoodpc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,325
    I wish I could say that NOD was extending into spyware . I have no clear answer so I will say I simply do not know . And , yes , F-prot DID use the KAV engine . Whether they still do or not , I am unsure . But KAV rated better ALWAYS . Why . If it is the same engine . Because KAV s updates came fast and furious . It is like sitting back and waiting for someone to report a story then , you take it and report on your station . You are always a step or two behind .
     
  21. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    So its the same with all the KAV clones too?
     
  22. Don Pelotas

    Don Pelotas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    2,257
    I remember too, just in time for the Av-Comparatives february test-deadline, a mere coincidence i'm sure.;) :D
     
  23. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    I'm sure too...hehe...;)

    But does that mean that these updates were used in the February comparative?
     
  24. Don Pelotas

    Don Pelotas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    2,257
    Yes, the deadline was around the 6/7 i believe, that large update was released on the 3. :)
     
  25. Sandish

    Sandish Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Posts:
    51
    It´s F-SECURE that makes use of the KAV engine - F-Prot comes with an own engine (that was / is used by F-Secure as second engine btw). F-Prot never used the KAV engine in their product.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.