How Does Nod32 Compare w/ Others???

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by feverfive, Jul 21, 2005.

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

    feverfive Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Posts:
    121
    Sorry, I know there are reviews aplenty, but I'm wondering, specifically, how does Nod32 compare to something like KAV Personal Pro 5.0? I am running a trial of KAV right now, but I'm intrigued by Nod32 as well. Any current Nod32 users here that previously used KAV? What are your impressions?
     
  2. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,722
    Location:
    Texas
    feverfive

    Since this isn't a support question, it will be moved to the other antivirus forum where comparisons are discussed. :)
     
  3. Patrician

    Patrician Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Posts:
    132
    Of the two my personal preference is for KAV (I have used both). It's protection is (in my opinion) just a little better than NOD32. NOD32's archive scanning is a little lacking and it's not as good at worms and malware as is KAV.
     
  4. fosius

    fosius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Posts:
    479
    Location:
    Partizanske, Slovakia
    But NOD32 offers the best zero-hour protection with its advanced heuristics...
     
  5. richrf

    richrf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Posts:
    1,907
    Yes, I think it comes down to NOD32's heuristics (for zero hour protection) vs. KAV's depth and breadth of malware (all types) scan/detection. I chose KAV and depend upon KL's very frequent daily updates to offset NOD32's heuristics. Of course, I also run other real-time security products (e.g. ProcessGuard, RegDefend, WormGuard) to provide me with some degree of zero-hour protection. I also run Ewido to backup KAV and I would guess I would also run Ewido if I was using NOD32.

    Rich
     
  6. ellison64

    ellison64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Posts:
    2,499
    I have used both and have current licences for both.Of the two i prefer kav.Ive had some issues with nod and its ad/spyware detection.Kav (with extended databases) is much better in this regard in my view.Also I guess its not scientific but in the past ive downloaded cracks etc and visited warez sites just to see how an av performs.Nod has missed some trojan downloaders,but kav hasnt let me down yet.Nod has advanced heuristics but personally when i used nod ,AH didnt catch anything ,including some of the warz sites downloaders (which kav did) though it has for some other users.Personally id trial both and see which you prefer.
    ellison
     
  7. feverfive

    feverfive Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Posts:
    121
    ^^I will definitely do that, thanks for all the replies. So far, I'm pretty impressed w/ KAV's smaller-than-expected system usage footprint. I had always heard it was a resource hog; must've been that way w/ previous versions. I have 2GB of memory, so I have plenty to spare, but it's still nice to see usage w/in reasonable limits. So far, it looks like it's down to either KAV or Nod32 for me.
     
  8. JimIT

    JimIT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,035
    Location:
    Denton, Texas
    I think that either one would be a fine choice.

    :)
     
  9. Mr2cents

    Mr2cents Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Posts:
    497
    I have licence for both Nod32 and kav. Both are tremendous antivirus products. However, I prefer kav. I feel safer with the better trojan detection that kav offers...even though I run Boclean with kav. I also ran Boclean with Nod32.

    IMO. You can't go wrong with either product. Pick the one you like and run it. Don't forget your anti trojan.. TDS3, Boclean, Ewido, TrojanHunter..etc
     
  10. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I also have a license for Kav and Nod but I have had problems with nod and prefer Kav quite a bit. But am currently running mcafee 8.0i enterprise.
     
  11. Brian N

    Brian N Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,148
    Location:
    Denmark
    I have been using Panda for about 3 years, but a few months ago I wanted a new one because Panda was getting ridiculously slow (took 2 mins before the scan would even start). I tried KAV, Bitdefender, McAfee, Trend & Avast and found most of them either too slow, memory hogs or had very few settings you could tweak (which I like to have).

    So I tried NOD and I never looked back - It's fast I can't even tell it's there, it's extremely lightweight (usually around 5-10KB, 10-20 when new signature applied) and has loads of settings & options, just the way I like it. Also the slick design of the app is just too cool :) I don't really mind the lack of trojan detection (although it has detected a few on my pc) because I have Ewido too now.

    I'm sure KAV is an excellent AV, but it was just too slow for me.
    I'll stick with NOD and planning on doing so for many years to come :D
     
  12. feverfive

    feverfive Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Posts:
    121
    I agree, layered defense is the way to go. Right now I have CounterSpy (running resident); Ewido (free--might purchase to run resident as well); SpywareBlaster; Spybot (for the hosts file mostly--also use as on-demand though it never finds anything); Zone Alarm in addition to my trial of KAV. I'm still playing around w/ what combo works best for me.
     
  13. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    I use KAV and NOD on different machines.

    They both are good. Currently using NOD32 on a game machine. On my end, I like the fact that NOD has minimal CPU impact on the gaming machine even with their Advanced Heuristics marked on which helps provide zero-hour protection.

    Of course each platform is a bit different and others may have different
    results.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.