NIS 2009 Full System Scan time

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Bunkhouse Buck, Sep 14, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I ran a Full System Scan yesterday and it took 3 hours and 59 minutes to scan 1,014,51 files. 950 were trusted and 0 skipped. This is about 2X as long as a full system scan with Avira.

    My question to users is, is 4 hours a typical duration for a full scan on a million files? Your comments are appreciated in advance.
     
  2. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    thats a long time but that is a boat load of files. I an going to do an on demand scan right now and I will post back here as to how long and how many files it scanned.
     
  3. Motherroad

    Motherroad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Posts:
    234
    Location:
    Florida
    I did a full scan with 239000 files and it lasted for 2 hours and 39 minutes. Avira is a lot faster on scans.
     
  4. Halo326

    Halo326 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Posts:
    106
    Why do people complain about scan times. Do a full scan and walk away. Every pc is different and every pc has more files then others. I have about 900,000 files to scan. Any scanner I have ever used takes about 3 hours. No biggie unless your sitting there and watching it. NIS states full scan is nto need either.
     
  5. JasSolo

    JasSolo Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Posts:
    414
    Location:
    Denmark
    I did a full system scan 5 days ago. It scanned 450,884 files and it took 22 minutes and 23 seconds.


    Cheers
     
  6. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I just did a full scan and here is what it scanned in 12 minutes and found one tracking cookie :D
     
  7. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I am not complaining- I am seeking user feedback on scan times.
     
  8. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I have no idea how that is possible. Even at the Symantec forum, they are saying (mostly) that my time is typical. So both cannot be logically correct. Not doubting your experience- I just do not understand the differential.
     
  9. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    It makes a whole lot of difference in scan speed depending on your hardware and software setup. My quad core processor doesn't strain any on an on demand scan.
     
  10. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    one other thought, My norton 2008 never took over thirty minutes to scan the same computer.
     
  11. Halo326

    Halo326 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Posts:
    106
    Very true. It all depends on how fast your pc is not just how fast NIS scans. It can only scan as fast as your cpu lets it.
     
  12. JasSolo

    JasSolo Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Posts:
    414
    Location:
    Denmark
    Just finished a new scan. This time it scanned 563,666 files in 22 minutes and 40 seconds.


    Cheers
     
  13. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    That is likely the explanation which I of course considered, but it appears that a quad core processor offers geometric incremental speed increases to complete any scan compared to a single core processor that I am using on the laptop in question.
     
  14. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    as long as it gets the job done and finds any baddies it's all good :D
     
  15. Halo326

    Halo326 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Posts:
    106

    So true. Symantec actually states full scan is not needed. Thats why its off by default. Anytime I have ever run a full scan with anything I do it before I go to bed. When you wake up its done. Who cares about how long it takes when your sleeping. Correct.
     
  16. Dark Shadow

    Dark Shadow Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Posts:
    4,553
    Location:
    USA
    Hi BunkHouse Buck I just did a foreground full system scan with 6 % trusted 94% needed at 47 minutes to complete of this many files.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. Halo326

    Halo326 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Posts:
    106
  18. Dark Shadow

    Dark Shadow Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Posts:
    4,553
    Location:
    USA
    What can make a difference on the scan speed is foreground or background if ya minimize it takes longer to complete the scan and turn frees up performance to other programs.
     

    Attached Files:

  19. Atomic_Ed

    Atomic_Ed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Posts:
    389
    I am not running NIS but is there a scan setting that may be like a deep or quick scan? Maybe some of the other users with alot lower times are scanning with different scan settings allowing it to complete quicker.
     
  20. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    it took 23mins for a full scan on my pc. with default settings. couldnt find many options to change.
    kaspersky 2009 takes around 25 mins. with kaspersky i put heristics to full, deep rootkit scan etc.
     
  21. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    on the highest settings i could find, it did mine is just 16 minutes.

    shockingly fast
     
  22. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,056
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    What is your hardware?
     
  23. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    just a laptop,

    2.1 t8100 intel dual core, 4gb ram, 320gb SATA HD, blu-ray drive , 16" widescreen 1080p lcd, 512mb nvidia geforce 9500 GS Turbocache graphics card.
     
  24. Fajo

    Fajo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Posts:
    1,812
    So pretty much this is the only thing that affected the test. (check Bold above)

    Lol anyways I tried it on my old AMD Barton 3000+

    617k files in 31 min. not to bad here.
     
  25. Wake2

    Wake2 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Posts:
    205
    I was running Avira Premium on this notebook, and windows firewall behind a router,
    scan times were generally about 48 minutes, computer runs Vista HP SP1, and has dual core
    at 2ghz, 3gb ram, 320 gig hard drive, and a nvidia 512 graphics card.

    I installed NIS 2009 and full scan took 37 minutes to scan 417,486 files.

    Wake
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.