NOD32 has become heavier

Discussion in 'NOD32 version 2 Forum' started by jg88swe, Jun 21, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jg88swe

    jg88swe Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Posts:
    181
    Hey,
    When I started using NOD32 (2.1) it was using a very small amount of memory around 10-12k.

    With the new versions it's using around 16-25k, I know that it may differ between computers but are there any plans to make the new version lighter?

    Disabling DMON and EMON doesn't help :)
    Using Defualt settings

    Windows XP
    AMD 2000+ XP
    756 MB
     
  2. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    It is different between systems - I've never bothered myself to try and figure out what exactly makes the difference.

    At this present moment, my NOD32 Enterprise reports
    nod32krn.exe 11,308 KB
    nod32kui.exe 5,504 KB

    You can be confident that ESET will continue to make all new versions as light as it is possible to make them. This I am quite certain of.

    HTH :)
     
  3. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,376
    Well, maybe if we removed some old virus definitions... :D
     
  4. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    heheh - now that's really funny :D
     
  5. pc-support

    pc-support Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    285
    Location:
    Edinburgh, UK
    Don't let Pykko hear you saying that! :p
     
  6. Brian N

    Brian N Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,148
    Location:
    Denmark
    I for one don't really care much about memory consumption because I have plenty.
    What worries me is how much CPU hungry an AV is, and NOD32 is still the lightest I've tried in that area. It's like a breath of fresh air when you uninstall your old AV and replace it with NOD32, it basically gives your PC it's powers back :thumb:
     
  7. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    i very much agree; tho id still be nice to leave memory for other programs that may need it.
     
  8. jg88swe

    jg88swe Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Posts:
    181
    Yeah...
    NOD32 is known to be ligh(est)...

    But Programs like F-Prot etc, are using less memory... :)
    Although they can't offer the same protection level.
    Just wondering if there would be any changes :)
     
  9. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Hmm....Are you saying that the more malware definitions in the database, the more heavy an AV gets?

    Then it means:

    More Malware Definitions eventually lead to bigger incremental or cumulative update size.
    More Malware Definitions means the NOD32 Scanner has to scan for more malware in files, which means more time is taken.
    More malware definitions means the AMON/IMON/DMON has to protect against more kinds of threats, which means it has to occupy a larger footprint in memory.

    So eventually, updates will become very big, and programs very heavy and slow. Is that true? :eek:
     
  10. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,376
    I can't imagine than an antivirus would be continually loading and unloading virus signatures when scanning files. I can only agree with the first out of the three points, the rest is untrue.
     
  11. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    Don't you dare. :D
    I"m testing my collection everyday and as soon as I spot something I'll tell you. :D :p *puppy* (joking of course, but now honestly are you planning to do such a thing? :'( )
     
  12. steve1955

    steve1955 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Posts:
    1,384
    Location:
    Sunny(in my dreams)Manchester,England
    Come on lets get real here 16-25k(approx 21k on my pc) is still "light",when you 1st used Nod most pc's prob had only 64-128mb(power user!!)of memory so its all relative,nowadays 1gb(and above) is common! %age wise nowadays Nod probably uses less of most users available memory than it did in days gone by
     
  13. larryb52

    larryb52 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Posts:
    1,126
    I agree I'm only at 19,000 how light do you want it? & be carefull what you wish for, problems have been known to pop up when updating a program or better put leave well enough alone...
     
  14. Suggers

    Suggers Guest

    I've used; NAV 2005, KAV 5, AVG free, and am now using Nod32. Nod32 is by far the 'lightest' of those I have used (I use a 6 year old, windows 98 PC with limited RAM). AVG comes pretty close to Nod in terms of 'lightness' on my computer, KAV was ok, NAV 2005 crashed it :D
     
  15. ejr

    ejr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    Posts:
    538
    As Heuristics improve, we won't need so many signatures. NOD presently has the best heuristics, but I iamagine that it will keep getting better.
     
  16. jg88swe

    jg88swe Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Posts:
    181
    Well...
    I'm not saying its become like every other AV...

    But if it keeps increasing its Memory usage, in the future it would use 40k...

    Vendors like Frisk and drweb has less memory usage :)
    And many vendors these days are improving their performance... Just thought Eset did so too
     
  17. steve1955

    steve1955 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Posts:
    1,384
    Location:
    Sunny(in my dreams)Manchester,England
    Even 40k aint too bad as long as protection is "worth it" depends on what trade offs are important to you:- protection against system impact ,as long as impact remains low(memory+cpu load!) and protection high I for one am not bothered if others are lower in memory usage,I choose an AV for protection as the first consideration
     
  18. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Don't worry, my earlier post was a half-joke. :)

    However, I do realise the whole database is loaded when an On-Demand scan is run, but since there is more malware to scan for after every update, wouldn't it take a few more CPU cycles to scan for additional malware code?

    Of course, I'm assuming such diferences would be quite negligible, and not noticeable till the next 1000 years, that is if you still kept your Intel Pentium 4 by then :D
     
  19. marcromero

    marcromero Guest

    I was an F-prot user prior to becoming a NOD32 user, F-prot was light and ran very well on my laptop, NOD32 runs equally well even though nod32krn.exe is 20,116 and nod32kui.exe is 2,168 ram usage at the moment, cpu percentage is cycling at 5-8%, I find this extraordinary in the performance area for an antivirus, my onboard ram is a single 512 stick and my laptop doesn't miss a beat, plenty of ram for everything I do, ram usage is not that important in my opinion, it's easily increased if needed, cpu cycles, now that's another story...
     
  20. YeOldeStonecat

    YeOldeStonecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Posts:
    2,345
    Location:
    Along the Shorelines somewhere in New England
    Heehee...see that screenshot of Task Manager when running NAV 2007 in the other AV forum? 140-ish megs! :eek: o_O :thumbd:
     
  21. marcromero

    marcromero Guest

    That's why I run NOD32 :D
     
  22. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    F-Port and Dr.Web could use less memory than NOD32, but they also have less features and worst detection compared with NOD32! ;)
     
  23. the_sly_dog

    the_sly_dog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Posts:
    297
    Location:
    The Heart Of London
  24. agoretsky

    agoretsky Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,032
    Location:
    California
    Hello,

    If you are in a computing environment where memory is at a premium, you can disable the NOD32 Control Center (filename: NOD32KUI.EXE) so it no longer runs automatically each time the computer starts up. This will save you about 2MB of memory (±0.5MB).

    You will still be able to access the NOD32 Control Center via the Start Menu, if you want to view or change NOD32's settings.

    Regards,

    Aryeh Goretsky
     
  25. Edwin024

    Edwin024 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Posts:
    1,000
    I do not find NOD too heavy, but it's quite amazing that the new Kaspersky IS 2006 is much lighter in use, even when it has more options... So I think that Marcos' answer is a bit strange.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.