Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by SIMONxi, Feb 26, 2005.
Of the two powerboy lightweights, which do you prefer and why?
NOD32, more configurable.
F-Prot is slightly lighter however.
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.
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.
I agree with Technodrome.
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.
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..........
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
Could you show me Or at least tell me where you gathered your info ? f-prot cleans better and detects better ? hmmmmmmm...........
One site where F-Prot seems better than NOD32...see the On-Demand comparatives.
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 .
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.
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.
Thas what I want to say, Blue...the only way is to trial and find out!
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 .
According to this test F-Prot detects a bit better than Nod32.
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.
I put no faith in that as the NOD engine is older . It was revamped since then . But thank you for the info
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.
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 .
So its the same with all the KAV clones too?
I remember too, just in time for the Av-Comparatives february test-deadline, a mere coincidence i'm sure.
I'm sure too...hehe...
But does that mean that these updates were used in the February comparative?
Yes, the deadline was around the 6/7 i believe, that large update was released on the 3.
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.
Separate names with a comma.