NOD32 : perceivable slowdown while surfin'

Discussion in 'NOD32 version 2 Forum' started by Imothep, Jan 10, 2005.

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

    Imothep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Posts:
    36
    Hi,

    Haven't you noticed a perceivable slowdown when surfing on the Net with NOD32 v2 o_O

    NB : I use Firefox 1.0
     
  2. -z3r0-

    -z3r0- Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    74
    Location:
    Pittsburgh PA
    I have noticed a little nit of slowdown when surfing but I think its because of the real time scan actually scanning things before you get to view them and I think thats a good thing if thats why.
     
  3. Imothep

    Imothep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Posts:
    36
    I totally agree with you :)

    I followed the "Extra settings for Nod32" and unfortunately on my machine the slowdown is really perceivable.

    I would like to know if other users (NOD32 v2) are in the same situation.
     
  4. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    I don't have any detectable slowdown on a P4 2.8 game machine I use with NOD and all settings marked on AMON and IMON.

    You may be having a conflict with another program and NOD?
     
  5. Atangel

    Atangel Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Posts:
    53
    No.

    Broadband connection, P4 2.4 GHz, 512MB RAM, NOD32 tweaked to high across the board, netgeat router, Firefox 1.0, Sygate Personal Firewall Pro.

    Maybe it's always been slow and I haven't noticed it getting any slower? o_O :D
     
  6. Imothep

    Imothep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Posts:
    36
    Hi,

    FireFox 1.0-ThunderBird 1.0, broadband connection 512/128, Athlon XP 1.5 Ghz, 256 Mo DDR, Win 2000 Pro.

    Here is my current security configuration :

    - Look 'n' Stop 2.05
    - Spyblocker 8.0
    - Pest Patrol 2005

    Any known incompatibilities ?

    NB : I mention that in the near future I intend to add ProcessGuard 3.1 and Spyware Guard.

    Thanks for your feedback :)
     
  7. NAMOR

    NAMOR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Posts:
    1,526
    Location:
    Arkham Asylum
    I haven't noticed any slowdown either... Is it possible that it is Spyblocker that is causing it? Since it is trying to filter out garbage from web pages... Just a shot in the dark.
     
  8. Notok

    Notok Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    Portland, OR (USA)
    I haven't noticed an actual slowdown, but there have been times that it's SEEMED slower because of how it scans everything and then sends it to your browser.. so you'll get more of a delay before you see the pics, etc, but then it all displays at once.
     
  9. NAMOR

    NAMOR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Posts:
    1,526
    Location:
    Arkham Asylum
    So maybe it's a combination of Spyblocker and NOD's http scanner that is causing the slow down on his machine... Who get's the web page first Spyblocker or NOD32?
     
  10. redwolfe_98

    redwolfe_98 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Posts:
    581
    Location:
    South Carolina, USA
    i noticed a significant slowdown while surfing the internet when i first installed NOD32, but rebooting cleared up the problem..

    i don't notice any slowdown in websurfing with nod32 (and i do have all of the settings maxed out)..

    yes, some pages take some time to load while imon is monitoring the download, but that is on rare occasions, and it doesn't bother me..
     
  11. profhsg

    profhsg Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Posts:
    145
    I too noticed some lag in displaying pages with lots of graphics when using my browser in higher efficiency mode. As an experiment you ought to try switching your browser to "higher compatability" in the IMON/HTTP/Setup area and see if it makes a difference. I have noticed that doing that did speed things up for me, but the lag wasn't bad enough to make me want to forego the extra security that the higher efficiency setting gives me.
     
  12. Imothep

    Imothep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Posts:
    36
    Hi,

    I have used other AV softwares before (with the same security configuration) and I have never encountered such problems while surfing.

    profhsg : I agree with you. I do not want to forego th extra protection but the slowdown is really perceivable :oops:
     
  13. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    A lot of folks choose NOD over some of the other AVs because it doesn't impact performance. That is the reason I use NOD on a game machine.

    It may be that when you were removing some of the other AVs you have used that they didn't uninstall completely and causing a conflict with NOD?
     
  14. Imothep

    Imothep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Posts:
    36
    Hi Stan999,

    I don't think so.

    All my applications are uninstalled with "Total Uninstall" plus "JV16 Power Tools".

    This package is surely the best one if you want to have proper uninstallations.
     
  15. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    If you check the CPU usage with the Windows Task Manager Processes tab does it show anything running too high except for the System Idle Process?

    If you disable IMON does that help with surfing?
     
  16. Imothep

    Imothep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Posts:
    36
    Hi Stan999,

    Nothing runs too high.

    For instance in my Task Manager:

    Firefox : 61 220 Ko (with 2 tabs)
    Pest Patrol : 13 372 Ko
    SpyBlocker : 8 884 Ko
    Nod32krn : 6 904 Ko

    When switching to the "High Compatibility" mode (FireFox and SpyBlocker), there is a slight improvement but it is not blatant at all :oops:

    Any idea ?
     
  17. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    If you disable IMON does that help?
     
  18. Imothep

    Imothep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Posts:
    36
    Definetely yes !!!

    When disabling IMON everything is OK but as you can easily guess, I do not want to forego my extra protection.

    I am a little bit disappointed :oops:
     
  19. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    If you disable both Pest Patrol and SpyBlocker then enable IMON does that help?
     
  20. Imothep

    Imothep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Posts:
    36
    Hi Stan999,

    No unfortunately.

    When switching to "Higher Compatibility" mode (for Firefox and SpyBlocker), there is an improvement (although slight) but it is better than nothing. I would say it is passable.

    But the only way to restore the normal connection speed is to disable IMON.

    Don't you think it is a bug of NOD32 v2 ?

    Thanks for your help :)
     
  21. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    Hi Imothep,

    I don't have any slowdown using IMON and the HTTP scanner on a P4 2.8 machine with a cable connection. I even tested it on a old PIII 500 machine
    with no slowdown.

    No sure what may be causing the issue on your platform?

    Are you using a proxy connection?
     
  22. Imothep

    Imothep Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Posts:
    36
    Hi Stan999,

    My problem only focuses on surf speed.

    It is really maddening because NOD32 is a great program and according to many competent reviewers it is certainly one of the best AV program ever designed (light on the ressources, extremely fast, state of the art technology).

    My opinion is that it would be useless to run it (ie : IMON/Higher Compatibility) without taking advantage of its outstanding features.

    NB : I forgot to mention that I use a host file with SpyBlocker which is rather big. Hope this helps :doubt:
     
  23. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,721
    Location:
    Texas
    I would turn off real time scanning of every other program and see if that helps.
    There is some sort of conflict somewhere.

    Do you have any other antivirus programs on your computer? What antivirus program did you use before using NOD and is it entirely removed from your system?
     
  24. Stan999

    Stan999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2002
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX USA
    Hi Imothep,

    That is what I am referring to also. I don't detect any noticable difference with the IMON HTTP scanner enabled or disabled when surfing with either a P4 2.8 machine or the P3 500 machine and a 3Mb download speed cable connection.

    As a test I even uploaded 10 1MB jpg files to a website and checked the time it took to download and fully display the page with the picture files and clearing the browser cache each time. I didn't see any detectable time difference with the IMON HTTP scanner enabled or disabled.

    I wouldn't think your large HOSTS file would cause any problem. You could always rename it to check and then rename it back.

    The only other thing I can think of is that you might try to completey uninstall SpyBlocker to check that.

    If uninstalling SpyBlocker doesn't make any difference perhaps some other folks here can offer some suggestions.
     
  25. Gauthreau

    Gauthreau Guest

    Run a few speed tests with IMON on/off and post the results here.

    I don't notice any difference with it on or off on my AMD XP-M 2200. I've run speed tests with IMON on and off. I did notice a total system lag with NAV 2005.


    Neil
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.