how much RAM memory does AVs uses?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by sach1000rt, Jun 3, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sach1000rt

    sach1000rt Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    171
    Location:
    india
    So i have one little question.
    How much RAM memory does nod32,kaspersky,avast,avg and trend micro uses(not while scanning)?
    Since i have so much heavy work to do on my system so i had this question and i dont want these AVs or security suites to interrept my work.
    As i saw i think nod32 is the one which uses less memory.but i want good protection(internet also) so which one of above will be worth it?
     
  2. i_g

    i_g Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Posts:
    133
    The only thing you can do is try the products yourself and decide according to their behavior on your system.
    Anything people write here (as much contradictory as it might be) will probably have little relevance for your system.
     
  3. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    nod32 is the one which wouldnt get in your way ever since its really really light.
    the detection rate is decent.
    bitdefender could also be an option since that is light as well and is set and forget.
    kis6.0 is quite light as well.
    the only way to know is test one at a time to see how welll they work on your system. the above is just guidelines.
    lodore
     
  4. sach1000rt

    sach1000rt Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    171
    Location:
    india
    so which one of NOD32(ESS),KIS 6or7,bitdefender is better in all aspects
     
  5. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    every pc software/hardware configaration is different.
    its very hard to tell unless you trial the software on your own pc.
    kis7.0 is in technical realese the final should come out this month.
    ESS is in beta atm so its not reccomended to use it on a production system.
    lodore
     
  6. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    AVG (by far) for system performance
    Kaspersky for 'actual' memory usage
     
  7. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    i would have to say i have found avg7.5 heaver than avg7.0.
    nod32 i have always found to be the lightest av with no stablity issues.
    in testing never had a single problem with nod32.
    the normal problems with nod32 is due to bad uninstall of an old AV.
    for an easy life nod32 is normally your best bet.
    what a strange day Chris is reccomending avg and Kaspersky and im reccomending nod32:D
    lodore
     
  8. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    nod is definatly good for sure, it beats avg for actual ram usage, but not for system performance or drag-down or boot times or anything, so here i favoured AVG, but if you talk of actual ram usage, nod is low on ram usage, does not beat kaspersky here, so in this particular argument, i said kaspersky.

    nod is definatly good at both, but depending which argument he prefers, there are better options.

    nod is a middle-pack of both arguments, swinging more to the winners side for sure, but its not the best at both those arguments above, it still is good at both though.
     
  9. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    ye your right its a hard choose.
    both nod32 and avg are decent.
    lodore
     
  10. YeOldeStonecat

    YeOldeStonecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Posts:
    2,345
    Location:
    Along the Shorelines somewhere in New England
    I agree with this...I've (and end users) have found NOD32 to be lighter on their systems after replacing AVG with it. Back with verion 6 it was fairly light, but with 7 and 7.5..it's gotten heavy (and detection rates plummeted)
     
  11. sach1000rt

    sach1000rt Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    171
    Location:
    india
    im using 1GB RAM(thinking of upgrading to 2GB) and i dont wanna install more than one security software.
    So guys tell me which security suite comes with best antivirus and best antispyware or firewall?
     
  12. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    sach1000rt,

    There is no context insensitive "best", it is always within the context of how you use the product and the challenges encountered in you using it. There are multiple threads in the forum regarding 3rd party test evaluations of groups of products, those are a good place to start reading.

    As for RAM consumption, to be perfectly blunt, if you are looking at differential RAM footprints between products, you are focusing on the wrong attribute. The differentials are in the noise (i.e. a range of 10-60 MB simply doesn't matter on a 1GB base system). What may matter is drag on heavy duty file I/O or context switching, but that depends on the specific products that you are using.

    Trial some specific options (those you mentioned in this thread are all viable) and select the one that performs best according to the traits that you weigh heavily.

    Blue
     
  13. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    sach i think your looking for norton
     
  14. sach1000rt

    sach1000rt Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    171
    Location:
    india
    No, But its a good one. All i heard about norton from many people is that norton is a big resource hogger. All im here is to find out the good all in one program.And im a little bit of safe surfer in the internet
     
  15. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i told you, norton.

    no, its not a resource hog.

    2007 has been completly re-vamped.
     
  16. mercurie

    mercurie A Friendly Creature

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    2,442
    Location:
    Sky over the Wilders Forest
    There are averages that can be posted for memory uesage, but in all my years my experience is that each system is set up different and has different apps. with different set ups. Some PCs have more left over trash from old programs, with different versions of Windows some patched some not....there are just way to many variables.

    Memory "creeping" up over time it is even worse of an issue. :doubt:
     
  17. EliteKiller

    EliteKiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Posts:
    1,138
    Location:
    TX
    BlueZannetti, you summed up my thoughts and saved me from having to type them out. :)
     
  18. sach1000rt

    sach1000rt Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    171
    Location:
    india
    as per as norton and me, when i used(yes that same nis 2007 trial) it, my pc was slow while startup, and scanning.But when i switched to nod32 it was like lightning fast. And when i tried kaspersky it was same as nod32 exept while scanning(a bit of drag). But my problem with nod32 is it doesnt have firewall and not that good antispy.
     
  19. bellgamin

    bellgamin Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    5,648
    Location:
    Hawaii
    For the AV's I have used & or trialed, total working bytes (RAM) for all processes listed by Process Explorer was as follows...

    Megabytes
    Avira 12.1
    DrW 4.04
    FProt-v6 15.0
    Moon 31.3
    NOD 23.6
     
  20. i_g

    i_g Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Posts:
    133
    Ah, here we go again... the numbers.
    Please, you cannot say anything from these numbers - as was explained multiple times here. It's possible to allocate memory in such a way that it doesn't appear in Task Manager / Process Explorer. On the other hand, some memory blocks might be shared between multiple processes of the antivirus - so it's allocated only once, but if you sum the numbers for the processes, you'll count it multiple times.

    So, unless you know in detail how each particular antivirus is programmed internally (which you don't), these numbers have about the same meaning as any other random ones. Again - these numbers say very little about how much memory the particular AVs use (besides, memory usage is only one of many aspects affecting the system performance or possible slowdown).
     
  21. bellgamin

    bellgamin Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    5,648
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Read the title of this thread. I replied to that specific question as best I could. Please descend from thy pedestal and cease being so condescending -- you are preaching to the choir, not a bunch of neophytes. NO one here is advocating unquestioning/brainless application of raw numbers.
     
  22. vtn54

    vtn54 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Posts:
    13
  23. i_g

    i_g Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Posts:
    133
    I'm not saying you didn't do your best - but it doesn't change the fact that the numbers don't have any sense. They are "summed numbers shown in Process Explorer", which has very little in common with "how much memory does the program use".

    I'm trying to say that the question asked doesn't have any reasonable answer - so it's pointless to try to give one.
     
  24. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    if using newsgroups,

    it is spidermail for drweb that uses CPU when downloading, and not spiderguard.

    and its usually 5-20% cpu when downloading,

    if download from the internet such as torrents and websites, it is spiderguard what does the scanning, and its usually about the same cpu as above.

    is this right? o_O

    4mb for drweb, ive never had it 'that low' ... so dont really understand the figures for that one, maybe if you didnt use the schedular or the spidermail, then maybe it WOULD be 2-4mb for just the antivirus.
     
  25. InfinityAz

    InfinityAz Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Posts:
    828
    Location:
    Arizona
    As stated by others, and depending on what you use your computer for, 1GB RAM should be enough. As also stated, you should try each and see how it affects your systems performance. For comparison, here are the numbers for percentage of system slowdown from the last PC World test (done by avtest and arranged in order of finish):

    Product - % System Slowdown (Firefox 2/Office 2003)
    KAV 6 - 24%/10%
    Norton 2007 - 13%/10%
    Bitdefender 10 - 187%/124%
    NOD32 - 4%/5%
    Panda 2007 - 3%/4%
    Avast Pro - 11%/4%
    AVG 7.5 Pro -5%/2%
    Trend Micro 2007 - 18%/9%
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.