NOD32 V3.0.566.0 - slows everything down?

I have done the same exact thing, and even suggested it in another thread. I did not use the HTTP scanning at all in v.2.7 because of slowdown and I have a fast system.

This is a good addition to v.3 - the ability to exclude extensions. Scanning of the jpegs and gifs on a Webpage will slow down page loading significantly. Does the same with KAV.

 

Thats where I got the idea!

 

I was reinstalling from scratch, and I saw that NOD32 v3 was released...

I did a clean install of Vista Ultimate (32bit) -> chipset & video drivers (nVidia 680i / 8800 GTX) -> and then NOD32 v3

Nothing else installed except Firefox and Windows updates...

At first, I actually through I had some sort of sudden firewall, network, or hard drive problem. There is a solid 1+ second pause/delay before loading any web page, both in Firefox and IE7. It's like clicking did absolutely nothing for a second.

Before the install, I could click through at least 5 web pages in the time it takes to load one with ESET NOD32 v3. Unusable for me out of the box.

It reminds me of when BitDefender was first released for Vista.

 

Are you using XP or Vista?

 

Only speed issue i have with NOD V.3 on my Test Machine is the Ultra slow shut-downs. Really bad.

 

It even made me reinstall Vista Ultimate 64 and go for another suite... I really hope Eset will get its act together but the absolute silence really worries me.

 

I am on XP.

 

On "Real Time File System Protection" uncheck the box "At computer Shutdown" - it's a bit more 'protection' than you need 99.999% of the time in my opinion.

 

Perhaps ESET could publish figures as to how many people have purchased v3 and how many are on a trial. Then I would be interested to see how many people are raising support tickets with ESET and how many issues are down to the user setup, rather than ESET software issues.

Could ESET work on a Known Problems section on the website? I am sure this would cut down alot of the moans on this forum.

We must remember that NOD is excellent at doing its job, the job of protecting our computers at home and work. I most cases it is also very quick at doing its job. Keep up the good work!

 

Thanks, ill try that.

 

Re: NOD32 V3.0.566.0 - slows...- MY SOLUTION!

yes, it tells you that your method is overkill, and coupled with your writing style and inability to write 'program' puts serious doubt to your credibility, or at the very least that of your governments programs.

You strangely advertise 'Hard Disk Indicator' in both your posts, it's a rather pointless little program with the amount of background processes that cause disk activity on modern machines, and it's inability to report activity on individual disks, or in fact any specific information at all, other than ...sometihng is reading or writing....somewhere.
Unless your having actual hardware problems it's a waste of time and Sysinternals process monitor would be far more appropriate for any actually useful disk activity tracing or system diagnosis.

Applications ARE 'really finished' when their process has cleanly exited, this is normally pretty instantly after any visible windows or systray icons have vanished from view, and can be checked with task manager (or more accurately sysinternals process monitor) if you have cause for concern. Exceptions are when programs do not cleanly exit, but this is exceedingly rare with uninstall applications.

Your disk will not start screwing up your data just because another program has asked to read or write to disk.

The only way your data could be adversely effected would be if your machine crashed hard (full OS lock, BSOD, or hard reboot/hard shutdown) before the disk could finish, and the cache was flushed.

Telling your OS to shut down or reboot cleanly (ie start -> shutdown -> reboot in XP) will always allow your disk to flush fully unless something is severely wrong with your system.

Applications and services are polled by the system on reboot/shutdown and will only terminate un-cleanly if, after 20 seconds (registry configurable, see below) they do not respond (ie. crashed), if they regain responsiveness in that time the counter is reset and they can close cleanly, finish writing files etc etc.

if your really paranoid you can increase the waittokillservice, and waittokillapptimeout and related values, or if your not, decrease them for speedier reboots.

HKEY CURRENT USER\Control Panel\Desktop\

WaitToKillAppTimeout (string value, time in milliseconds, default 20000)
HungAppTimeout (string value, time in milliseconds, default 5000)
AutoEndTasks (string value, 0 or 1, default 0)

(the above are sometimes not present, but can be added manually)

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\

WaitToKillServiceTimeout (String value, time in milliseconds, default 20000)

You clearly have a very poor understanding of what chkdsk does. chkdks verifies the file system, the file system is NOT "XP", it is also very unlikely to have become corrupted simply by uninstalling an application, or general activity unless something is wrong with your equipment, it is very likely to become corrupted by powering down a drive before it has chance to flush it's cache though, see earlier (and later) comments.

it is useful to run chkdsk occasionally in case of corruption, it is automatically run by windows if it it detects an event that is likely to have caused corruption has occurred (unintended restart) so the volume is marked dirty, running it too often over zealously is merely causing unnecessary wear and tear on your drives.

It is recommended to run chkdsk before defragging simply because defrag alters the file system so much, faults could be significantly compounded.
Most defrag tools will offer to do this for you before a manual defrag.

diskeeper is an excellent product and has reclaimed the no.1 defrag crown with the last 2 major releases.

However you've gone totally OTT on the waiting between operations, number of time consuming tasks (chkdsk, defrag), and the HD activity monitoring. your time and effort would be far better targeted on real security issues. It's certainly not a system that anyone would employ who had charge over more than a single machine.

The disk activity light will caused by any file read/write no matter how small, not necessarily anything to do with the program you've just been accessing, installing or removing, it's pointless to wait. heck, any file access under 10mb will be finished in less than a second on any machine built in the last 5 years anyway, in fact with products like diskeeper and o&o defrag's real-time defragmentation you could be waiting for hours, because as soon as user activity is reduced as you wait, and your new files have finished writing, the auto defrag will kick in so the disk will be in use again.

If your waiting to uninstall an application, then if it's not closed the uninstaller should either ask you to close it, or do it for you, all files it used if they were locked, will be freed, and the uninstaller will continue, if for some reason they are locked it will prompt you, or a good uninstaller (installshield, unwise) will set itself to clean up any locked files after the next reboot, this is WHY they ask you to reboot your machine at the end.

Of course it doesn't hurt to check the programs directory afterwards in case anything has been left behind, user generated files and log files are often left if they were in the programs directory.

Any defrag application's manual defrag option will intelligently deal with the file after it has finished being accessed. If the drive is is heavy use when defrag begins then a manual defrag would be slower, but will still complete cleanly. Automatic (realtime) defrag such as diskeeper/perfectdisk etc provides will carry on as normal and wait for activity to come to a minimum before starting.

'active' (locked) files, mostly being system files in use by the OS will still be locked as long as the OS is running, or the program is running, wait as long as you like and these files will not magically unlock. Either you have a defrag system that can deal with (most of) them, or your only choice is boot time defrag provided by some defrag tools that runs before the OS loads (boot time defrag is the only way to defrag a pagefile without deleting it also).

There is no point to waiting needlessly beyond the end of a file write, if you've been saving work in a program, the file will have finished writing at least to disk cache, if not the disk itself) before the program window fully disappears, clearing the pagefile, other OS housekeeping could take considerably longer, but will all be finish fully before an OS instigated reboot completes.

Diskeeper and some others can in fact defrag many locked files, including in the current version the MFT and folder consolidation, during realtime defragmentation.

It is 'nice' to have a defragged system before an install, but unless you have a very limited amount of free space on your disk, or your installing an application made up of large data files, then it's very unlikely things will be very fragmented on install, you would in fact more likely benefit more from defragging after the installation to have a better chance of the files in the folder being stored contiguously, as you wouldn't be relying on a straight free row of clusters large enough for the whole application. (nb. this is all dependant on the defrag algorithm used anyway)

This makes no sense what so ever, deletion removes the entry from the MFT, the actual data sectors are not edited, fragmentation does not change until either you defrag the drive, or another write operation like creating a file overwrites them.

If by fragmentation you actually mean data corruption, then again this isn't an issue as your deleting.

A lot of your post seems to imply by 'restart' you have been hitting the reset button on your maching, rather than telling your OS to reboot, the former CAN cause disk corruption, as your HD is not given the chance to flush it's cache.

this would also explain your devotion to 'Hard Disk Indicator', when your OS is shut down (or shut down as part of a reboot), the hard disks will cleanly flush their cache to disk, this will show activity on the flashing lights if your motherboard is hooked to an HD LED, the only reason for this not to complete would be a faulty disk.

if the OS crashes or is forced to stop prematurely by hardware reboot, or hard shut down then the disk cache flush cannot occur and data can be lost.

If your having enough data issues that your sat watching your actvity light (or 'Hard Disk Indicator' program), despite cleanly rebooting your OS, then you can verify your flush worries by instead FORCING all your drives to flush their data with sysinternals sync http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/FileAndDisk/Sync.mspx
the sysinternals apps are free still, even after their purchase from microsoft.

if you find forcing a disk flush before major disk activity, or shutdown or reboots causes your corruption issues to go away, then your system is in dire need of repair, either your OS disk controller drivers, your disk controller hardware, or your hard disk itself is most likely damaged and in need of replacement. (I have actually experienced unreliable cache flushing with an Adaptec 1210SA Sata Controller, but it is exceedingly rare)

an uninstaller that is coded to remove services will stop the services first for you, then remove them. They are not coded intentionally to not remove them, and if they were, then stopping the service would not magically make the uninstaller decide to go against it's programming and remove them for you.

Better to not worry about it before you uninstall as chances are the uninstaller will do a proper job. Afterwards however, double check your services for unneeded entries that may have been left behind after the reboot, and then clean up then as necessary.
to clean up :
1. Start -> run (or winkey+r) type "services.msc" (no quotes) hit enter (or access it via computer management)
2. Choose properties on the service you wish to remove (eg nod32 kernel service) and get it's actual 'Service Name' from the top of the 'General' tab, and note down the path to the executable.
3. Attempt to stop the service from the service manager by clicking the stop button. (most services should always stop from this action, nod32 will not if the product is still fully installed and running as it is protected, but as you've just uninstalled it it should stop)
4. start -> run -> type "cmd" (enter) (if in Vista, hold left shift+ctrl for an Administrator cmd prompt)
5. type "sc delete (insert Service Name here from step 2, no brackets)" (enter, no quotes)
eg:

sc delete nod32krnl

and the service will be deleted from the registry.

6. track down the services executable from step 2, and manually delete the file.

if your confident with the registry it's worth checking HKLM/software/ and HKCU/Software/ for the company name that produces the application you are removing, or the applications name itself. anything further should be left to automated registry cleaning tools unless you are searching for specifics, but always be sure they backup anything they remove, and you know where the backups are stored, and how to reinstate them.

'registry workshop' is an outstanding registry editor, with an address bar that understands standard registry abbreviation, and a very powerful search function.

 

Re: NOD32 V3.0.566.0 -slow... Reply from ESET...!?

A. I issued an ESET support ticket, on the V3 slowdown issue (I just closed the ticket.)!-
ESET told me I was the first person to report this issue (plausible deniability?)?- If V3 users don't start complaining to ESET about this slowdown issue, then it probably never will be fixed!

1. ESET had me run a GREAT fast freeware pgm called- "Belarc Advisor PC Audit", and email them the results...
Belarc Advisor scans most every security pgm... on your computer- Web report then tells you if you are up-to-date, or they are corrupted... (Green is good, and Red is bad)! Then recommendations (makes no changes!)...
http://www.belarc.com/free_download.html
a. My system was 100%, other than 1 small XP update that could only be gotten with Microsoft Update, instead of Windows Update (hours on this solution!)-
ESET could offer no explanation to my slowdown issue?

2. I then asked ESET if V3 was any better than V2.7, and if they would continue to support V2.7?-
a. ESET replied that V3 had enhanced in memory scanning.
1. This is where I feel, "may" be the problem!?- If I enable Memory shield/Scanning on my Spy Sweeper AS- My system slows much the same, on ALL web processes! Is V3 scanning memory, on "every" open...?!
a. I have 4gig of memory!- I wonder if users that report no slowdown issues, have much less memory? Conversely are users that have extra memory...- The ones that are reporting problemS?- Please post?!

b. ESET also said that they would support V2.7, for a long time into the future!

B. As for users disabling security features (.jpg, .gif, threatsense, ...), in order to stay with V3?- I Googled this, and malware can now attach... to jpg files (hidden- especially if malware is already on your system!)!
1. V2.7 scans these files, and no slowdown!- I stand by my original solution to reinstall V2.7!
2. My earlier detailed uninstall/reinstall post... is "foolproof"!- leaves no traces..., no manual editing of the registry, and can be followed by novice users too!

C. As for Yakumo's disparaging reviews of my earlier posts!- I don't agree with his "risky/underkill" contradictory alternative solutions (manual edit registry, don't always pre-stop ALL pgms services..., decreasing waittokill... (this caused me problems!- whatever happened to your letting process finish on restart?!)))!
Please get off my back!- Your incessant nit-picking complaints about semantics..., and techno-babble- are boring...!- I write detailed procedures that the novice can also follow, and "bottom line"- they work!
I read your other posts (you disable threatsense as a possible solution?), and see that you have had to reinstall!- I haven't (2 years, and just as fast!)! Listen up & learn!

1. My longer uninstall/reinstall procedure leaves nothing to chance, and works "perfectly"!
a. If you decide to not follow my ultra safe procedure!- Over a period of time your system "will" get slower & slower with conflicts... (been there, done that!)! I "used to" think that system reinstalling, was "normal" periodic system maint- not any more!
-The next time you are having to spend "hours", reinstalling your slower/corrupted... system!-

 

I use Revo Uninstaller and it works great. It wiped clean all NOD32 3.0 traces and I did a complete fresh install of NOD32 2.7.

 

Re: NOD32 V3.0.566.0 -slow... Reply from ESET...!?

They've got to be reading the forums?

 

Re: NOD32 V3.0.566.0 -slow... Reply from ESET...!?

Hmm they fed me that Bull once to

 

Re: NOD32 V3.0.566.0 -slow... Reply from ESET...!?

1. I suggested as you had expressed concerns you believed your data would be lost/corrupt if you didn't wait an inordinate amount of time before attempting a restart, that you INCREASE waittokill as you're clearly paranoid about it, and spend half your life sat waiting for your hard drive light to stop flickering. It was an aside that others with more faith in the system, who simply wanted faster reboots could opt to decrease the same setting, it's fairly common practice.

2. techno-babble? If you'd completed half the courses you claimed you wouldn't have any issues with it, and it's your high and mighty attitude, claims of computing superiority yet actual display of total lack of understanding as to the nature of the programs you ran that compelled, nay, FORCED me to post in the first place. I couldn't take such misinformed rubbish standing unchallenged (kudos to tsherr however) on a security forum.
I do however apologise for my over long rant to other browsers of the forum but I sought to attempt to explain in depth so that interested others could perhaps better understand, I made a bit of a hash of it but it was coming up to 6am and I was rather tired (and clearly crotchety)

3. And finally with response to your comments on my other thread reporting nod32 bugs, I did not 'reinstall' anything I installed a NEWER build of NOD32 in the hope that it fixed the problem. Disabling ThreatSense was nothing about a possible solution whatsoever, it's merely my personal preference not to send my files to Eset, but it warranted mentioning that I was not simply using the default install options.

 

I've just discovered that NOD32 V3 is making Adobe CS2 misbehave,
when CS2 is first run the screen flashes white for a few seconds then loads normally. I havent seen this issue for a long time not since some bad microsoft inellitype/point drivers.
If i exclude Adobe CS2 from NOD32 the problem goes away !!

 

I just tested as I have CS2 but nothing unusual with me. Why not try and update the mouse drivers and see if that is the issue again.

 

Hmmm , i dont have any drivers on here for mouse/keyboard now, dont need them, as soon as NOD V.3 is on here it goes haywire until i exclude CS2 in NODs exclude list. Only other thing updated was Adobe flash Player , not sure that would interfere with CS2 though.
I'll tinker a bit, may not be NOD after all.

 

Hello All,

Well, if I wasn't depressed, I guess I am now. First of all, thanks to everyone in the thread for commenting and sharing from their experience. ScottLS, I particularly appreciated your experience, thoughts and cohesive instructions.

Granny thought she would escape the McAfee on the 3 home office machines, subscription running out. YAY get that pig off the machines, clean up the registry (WHAT a chore, run cleaners, hand pluck), no small task. A friend said NOD32 wasn't bloatware, slick nice... Well, okay, how nice to have that again she thought, anything but McAfee, scared of Norton. Might as well get the ESET Smart Security with firewall and antivirus... With a 30 day trial, I could try it on all 3 machines to see how it ran on each of them before dropping $134 bucks (might as well get 2 year subscription, right? IF you can trust the company for decent updats...)

With the machines clean of McAfee and ZoneAlarm (which I have appreciated for years, running an older version), they were really cruising. Hmmm...they were cruising pretty good before getting them off. Time to install NOD32 trial version (the one available a few days ago). Nice quick install, interface seemed okay enough, putsed around and got the feel a bit, but was thinking of hunting up a support group for best settings and a bit of learning curve.

Decided to run the scan to see how that flew... Hmmm...sucking CPU big time on and off, flicking through browser and other pages sluggish all of a sudden (is this my imagination??), even clicking items in the software seemed slowed. I can tell you I absolutely saw a difference in the way these 3 machines ran while/while not scanning with NOD32 (I did not see this with McAfee). Video anomalies while trying to putz during the scan, oh UGH. The opening ESET screen (what is that type of screen called again?) hanging on one machine. Is that by design, a kinda nag during trial? Or is that just one more problem with this version? Yes, I have seen precisely what others in this thread mentioned seeing.

After running, playing with, and beta testing software on and off for many years, I knew something was "no bueno" with NOD32 V 3.0.566.0. I had 3 spunky machines that felt the difference (McAfee started looking good, we know we have a problem!) This was NOT the brag my techy bud talked about with no bloatware and slick. Okay... Head for the user community and there you all were, yup, something's wrong, they see it/feel it, I see it/feel it. Now I am super depressed.

What's worse... I put on 3 trial vers, thinking okay, test for a week or so, pay, register etc. Within 24 hours of the install of the two last machines installed, I'm getting a "security risk" warning asking for username/password. Huh, I'm a trial and I am NOT paying to get those until I "feel" this product. $90 a year for mere virus/firewall protection on 3 home office machines isn't chump change.

Note: Why are 2 of the 3 trials not showing the downloaded username/password that the 1st ver showed? This is gone? Hmmm...and WEIRD! Do each of their trial downloads have different user names installed in them? Should I have downloaded 3 different times on each machine? Anyway you look at it, WEIRD according to my experience.

So...I look up support options. Call before 5PM to their San Diego office, "ain't no one home in sales, ain't no one home in tech support" (things aren't looking good, I can't touch this company.) I put a tech support message in using the ESET website. What? These people don't know how to script a "Thank you, your message has been sent" page? (even I do that on my clumsy website). The browser was "blank" after sending the message, BUT I did get something in my email, "Got your message, here is your issue number, we'll be in touch." Okay, so it is nearly 24 hours later and I have no solution from ESET per their trial and just feeling protected on 2 machines. I have no live tech support, I have no live chat (not that live chat with McAfee feels like anything but a robot responding to key words). This isn't looking good for NOD32.

Now my dilemma... I can't roll back to a former version of NOD32 which might have been a slicker version making NOD32 look good (I don't think, how would a new user do that? I see no downloads for this on the ESET site.) Nope, instead, I suppose I get to roll back all 3 machines, start the cleanup from McAfee again (UGH!) and have to look for another AV product, maybe try to get ZA old ver installed (because I LIKE having a software firewall too!)

The ver NOD32 V 3.0.566.0 of ESET Smart Security is NOT comfortable, something's amiss and this old gal feels it too guys. Further, something is wrong when you can't get even a brief tech support help any quicker than this... It doesn't bode well, not when you are paying the big bucks. Ah...and whereas I was ready to pull the trigger on that hoping to get this off my shoulders, I now must absolutely reconsider.

Granny

 

WOW Granny thats one awesome post
Sorry that youre having problems, but you arent alone, not sure why it slows your systems down so much, even my trusty old 1.3ghz machine runs ok with version 3 (even though i dont like it) and yeah its full of bugs.... BUT...
they are being worked on so hang in there ok. Take care.

 

Hiya Poutine,

I would not say that NOD32 knocks me clean out of the water when scanning, I would say that there is a marked and unacceptable hit on performance. As much as I want/wanted to get rid of McAfee, and will if at all possible (its gone now, I would have to rebuy it UGH), it performed FAR better than NOD32 with this version does. That's scary NOD32 was my hope

Granny

 

Im sure eset will really get their teeth into the bugs and within 2 months or so, itll be performing really well , i am not happy with Version 3 at all, but i know if i move to another AV i'll regret it.

 

I also tried the trial of nod32 v3 and have found v2.7 very good in both vista and XP but v3 felt bloated and slow as well as a dumbed down gui.

 

i returned to v2.7 and everything runs so fast as if i bought a new pc. its sad, i really wanted to believe that there is no slowdon with v3. well lets hope for better times.