Panda using too much resource! Need replacement!!

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Gigabyte, Apr 29, 2006.

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

    Gigabyte Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Posts:
    163
    Location:
    NC,USA
    Ok, I have been using Panda Internet Security for the last two years or so. There product is good,but there latest Suite I think is a resource hog. For example,here are the number for the resources that it uses. I will just give numbers for the various functions..
    11,896k
    1468k
    10728k
    8580k
    40600k
    66000k Does this seem high to you gus/gals? I was looking in Zonealarm internet Security,but I hear that theres may be just as bad. So, I need a replacement for Panda. Other than the aforementioned problem,there True prevent Technology stops some of my legitimate programs from running,Boclean for example. They are taking there sweet time trying to rectify the problem.
     
  2. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    those numbers do not surprise me. Panda also runs a lot or background processes, even if u just have TruPrevent.

    ZoneAlarm SS is lighter than Panda, if ur considering it. for a suite, id go with KIS 2006. good AV, ok firewall, and it has proactive defense (HIPS).
     
  3. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    If resources are a consideration you might look at Computer associates Internet Security suite. It is a pretty fair setup and the resources are fairly low. But if you want real kick butt protection F-Secure Internet Security suite 2006 would be my recomendation. It uses the Kav av engine plus three more engines also. and it updates every hour and it has rootkit detection and antispyware and more. F-Secure actually runs very light on my computer.
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2006
  4. flyrfan111

    flyrfan111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,224
    The numbers don't surprise me either. In fact I think you might have missed a process or two, I thought PIS uses 6-8 processes, normally using a total of 80-100 megs of RAM.
     
  5. hamlet

    hamlet Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Posts:
    201
    Well, here is what I found out about security suites in the last two weeks on my computer. I started with NOD, Zone Alarm free, BOClean, and a few spyware apps such as AdAware, Spybot, and Spyware Blaster. I mostly use Firefox and have not had any issues with malware in a few years.

    My NOD subscription runs out in three or four weeks so I thought I might check out a security suite since that seems like it might be more efficient than separate apps.

    Here are my observations on the suites that I tested. I kept each for a few days. I should have made detailed notes on resource usage, but I didn't. These are listed in descending order of how well they ran on my machine. I have no idea how they might do at malware detection since I don't have any on my machine and don't collect any. I did check operation of the suites against the Eicar files and they all worked.

    I tried the latest versions of these. I am just reporting how they ran on my computer. I have a 3gb Pentium 4 with 1gb ram. Performance of these programs could be totally different on your computer.

    1. Trend Micro Internet Security Suite - Wow, my computer flies with this thing loaded! It has the same snappiness as when I have NOD running, if not better. This was a bit of a surprise since it looks to be a resource hog if you look at the services it runs. Its proxy service alone takes 65mb of ram on my computer. I guess there is a big difference between ram and processor time. If you try this suite out, pay attention to how your computer actually runs versus how much ram the application takes.

    Trend caused some weirdness with accessing my router's control panel and did not seem to want to let my computer shut down or restart when BOClean was running. I think I fixed that however, by reloading BOClean. I wasn't real excited about Trend's interface. The ZoneAlarm suite, I think, has a better interface.

    2. ZoneAlarm Security Suite - This performed just as well on my computer as Trend Micro. It seemed to have minimal impact on the computer's operation. I don't remember this thing having as many processes running as Panda or Trend. I think this one has a good firewall, as you would expect. I am not real thrilled by the antivirus element based on my daughter's experience with ZoneAlarm Antivirus on her laptop. She contracted a few nasties and now runs KAV.

    3. Norton Internet Security - Not bad at all. I noticed just a very slight hit on computer performance. I think this one has a huge number of services running on your computer also. They didn't seem to affect performance, however. Strangely, the program's interface responded slowly to clicks. I also got java script errors on two screens. That is probably my fault, however. In any case, if I was going to go with a suite, it would probably be this one. I think I trust the Norton protection a bit better than the two above.

    4. Panda Titanium Antivirus & Firewall - This program itself seemed to run sluggishly on my computer and has a bit of an impact on other programs. I also did not care too much for the interface of the program. There seem to be minimal options. This criticism actually can apply to most of these programs. I guess I have become used to the great flexibility of NOD.

    5. Bitdefender Internet Security - Yikes! This did not get along with my computer. It ran slow, very slow. I don't know why. I like the Bitdefender interface and it is very configurable, but it is apparently not meant to work on my machine.

    6. F-Secure Internet Security - Double Yikes! My computer was pretty sluggish with this loaded. I have to say this was a disappointment after seeing how well F-Secure did on the last AV Comparative. I am not sure if I left this on my computer long enough to give it a fair shot. I was having trouble accepting the long startup times and sluggish file opening. I guess I wasn't in the mood to tackle trying to figure out if something was wrong. I should have asked BigC how he got it to run on his computer so well.

    I didn't try the McAfee, Kaspersky, or AVK suites. I don't know why. I think I was tired of experimenting. :D

    So, I ended up going back to NOD but switched to Subelt Kerio personal firewall. I still have BOClean running. I am happy with this setup. It is snappy and I feel like I have top notch protection. I just don't think you are going to get the absolute best protection out of a suite unless you use the Kaspersky or Norton ones.

    I am going to stick with separate apps and check out the ESET suite when it comes out. You might want to try a good antivirus with a free firewall and a few free anti-spyware apps. This setup is cheaper than a suite and you can pick the individual pieces that you feel are the best in their area.

    I guess it is about time to renew the old NOD subscription for me.

    edit: grammar and spelling
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2006
  6. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    It is very high. For a comparison, I did a check today with KAV6 and Avast Home.
    Here are the figures for mem usage from Windows Task Manager.
    Kav 6 total - 11672 K
    Avast Home - 13,280 K

    I do not know if that is RAM or what.

    Jerry
     
  7. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    Just a note on my running F-Secure IS 2006. It runs as light as nod on this computer with better protection. I will admit that this new comp is no slouch when it comes to power and resources. I run a fast AMD processor and 1256 megs of ram, F-Secure IS 2006 actually runs lighter on here than Kav or nod. My last two computers don't like Nod very much. It might have something to do with the antivirus function in the processor. But all AV's will run differently on all computers so it is always wise to trial an av that you might like to have. Just to make sure that it is compatable with your comp and your self;)
     
  8. hamlet

    hamlet Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Posts:
    201
    Hmmm. I think I am going to give F-Secure another try in the morning. I will go about it in a systematic fashion and unload a few other things before loading F-Secure. I would be perfectly happy to run a suite if I could get the same performance and protection as what I have now. I assume F-Secure's suite gives great protection, so I will see if I can tweak the performance.

    After I try F-Secure one more time, I am swearing off programs switching for a while. I feel certain that my computer is going to revolt pretty soon if I keep loading and unloading programs, scanning, cleaning, defragging my hard drive, and deleting leftover registry keys. It is probably confused since I keep trying out packages and coming back to NOD. o_O
     
  9. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    Give F-Secure IS 2006 a few days and I think You will like it. I used to switch av programs at least once a week testing and checking new versions, but since I got F-secure I wont use anything else. The only single thing that I wish was just a little faster was f-secure loading at boot. But the extra fifteen seconds isn't really an inconvenience.
     
  10. hamlet

    hamlet Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Posts:
    201
    Ok, I decided not to wait until the morning. I uninstalled NOD, Kerio, BOClean, and AdAware. I cleaned my system with CCleaner and did a defrag. Then I loaded F-Secure. It seems to run a bit better than before. It does boot up reeeaaallll slow.

    I am going to leave it on for a few days. I don't want to totally hijack this thread, so I will start another one sometime in the next few days since I already have a few questions.

    By the way, I do really like the F-Secure interface. In my opinion, it is sharper than Trend Micro's.

    Ok, its getting late down here in Fort Worth. No time for a scan. See you tomorrow.
     
  11. Durad

    Durad Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2005
    Posts:
    591
    Location:
    Canada
    Isn't it true that speed mostly depend on how fast scanner can process a file, not how much of memory it actualy use?

    For example if a good scanner is used which use 40mb of RAM it can less effect computer speed than a poor coded scanner that use just 10mb..

    o_Oo_O?
     
  12. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    i think CPU is more important for scanning files. the memory is mostly for the processes and gui, or maybe a memory scanner (e.g. ewido)
     
  13. Gigabyte

    Gigabyte Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Posts:
    163
    Location:
    NC,USA
    I tried F-secure and it didn't play nicely with Spysweeper. Think I 'll give KIS a shot.
     
  14. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    I have used Spysweeper, and have a new CD that with rebates I got free. I have the impression that it may be the best AS, but it is aggressive, and has issues with more programs, such as UnHackMe, than Counterspy. I have had no issues with CS.

    SS is aware of some of the conflicts, I know they are re UnHackMe.

    I have had the following on at the same time as SS with no issues.
    KAV6, NOD32, and Avast.

    Jerry
     
  15. hamlet

    hamlet Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Posts:
    201
  16. Gigabyte

    Gigabyte Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Posts:
    163
    Location:
    NC,USA
    Thanks for the link. It looks like ZA is at the top or at the top with most of them. I think that I'll give it a try and see how I like it.;)
     
  17. javagreen

    javagreen Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Posts:
    96
    One more vote for F-Secure. I'm on F-Secure AVCS 6.01 and I am not going to change to another suite...ever.. unless its from F-Secure :D
     
  18. proll

    proll Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Posts:
    55
    I think panda 2006 is a good product that use more memory but litter cpu resource .
     
  19. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    Panda is not a good product , Panda is an excellent product (most likely cleaner) *but* the most annoying is that it takes too many resourses which is killing computers. I know this from real people , many are having problems with 2006 version and Panda Software is doing anything.

    That's why there is always NOD32 - the best !!! :) :D

    http://www.eset.com
    [MOVE] NOD32 [/MOVE]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 5, 2006
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.