pc cillian 2004 or mcafee

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by maddawgz, Mar 20, 2005.

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

    maddawgz Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Posts:
    1,276
    Location:
    Earth
    Hi i have pc cillian suite 2004 and Mcafee enterprise 8.0i with mcafee antispyware ... which is the best product to use? i do like the set and leave pc cillian 2004 firewall..as im not that great with firewalls and setting rules? thanks MD :eek:
     
  2. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    PC-cillin is easier to use but mcafee is going to give you better protection through better detection.

    bigc
     
  3. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    i must admit i tried both of these just for the heck of it and i agree with bigc. pc cillan will use less resources and be easier to use but mcafee will i feel offer better protection. especially in the firewall dept. there detection rates are always far superior to pc-cillan also if you check all of the testing done mcafee are always at the top of most lists
     
  4. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    CLOSE to the top - you got KAV to beat it always LOL :D
     
  5. Sputnik

    Sputnik Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,198
    Location:
    Москва
    Your McAfee with ZoneAlarm Free will serve you well :)
     
  6. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    your memory serves you well! :)
     
  7. Sputnik

    Sputnik Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,198
    Location:
    Москва
    Sure, but RAM-usage doesn't say everything... McAfee might use a lil more ram then KAV for example, but their scanner is faster IMHO... no offence to KAV ofcource, just notice of a fact :)
     
  8. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    So its more like RAM usage AND CPU usageo_O
     
  9. Sputnik

    Sputnik Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,198
    Location:
    Москва
    Ofcource, you can't judge a scanner on it's RAM usage only... But also on how efficient it is and the CPU usage too...
    For an example... F-Secure has a reasonable ram-usage (~18mb - ~26mb) but the CPU usage and scanning speed is less efficient then McAfee wich uses the same amount of ram...
    Scanning 28000 files takes F-Secure up to 12:39 min to scan, while McAfee does the job in less then 7 min... F-Prot only needs 4:47 min...

    It's all about compromises... We can advice people in their choise, but it remains personal preference...
     
  10. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    So its like...RAM usage, CPU usage and how efficiently a scanner is able to use that RAM and CPU, huh?
     
  11. Sputnik

    Sputnik Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,198
    Location:
    Москва
    Yes, it's like that...
     
  12. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    OK Thanks a lot StyleWarz :)

    Have a nice day :)

    Firecat
     
  13. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    What it is actually about is getting an av that works well with no conflicts on your comp that has dood detection. On demand scan speed is less important than having it do a good job and finding what malware might be hiding on your computer. Since this thread is about pc-cillin and mcafee I still say mcafee is the better choice all around on all accounts between these two antivirus programs.

    bigc
     
  14. Sputnik

    Sputnik Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,198
    Location:
    Москва
    Ofcource I agree with this...
    But I still think you've to consider the scanner efficiency... I'm also a fan of the Kaspersky engine, but it's efficiency is just bad... If you see how much McAfee detects, just a lil less then Kaspersky, but with only 1/3 of Kaspersky's scan time... That makes you doubt...
    So finding a good av is about the following points in my opinion:

    1) Does the product run good on your computer?
    2) Is the interface clear enough for you?
    3) Is the scanner efficiency good enough for you?
    4) How does it preform in tests?
    5) How many updates it gets in a week, and what's it's respond time to big threats?
     
  15. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I had mcafee 8.0i on here before I installed Kav 5.0.227 and the scan times between the two are not that far apart, probably not two minutes difference on my comp. Of course everyone is going to achive different results due to computer speed and software installed. But to me I will take a little hit is speed for the extra proitection. Regardless what is said about Kav it is still the best at all around detection rates against all types of malware. In my opinion mcafee would be my second choice as it is a very good av also.

    bigc
     
  16. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    TrendMicro/Pc-Cillin 2005 surprised me with it's detection rate. All av:s that have 90.0 % or more detection against my 3366 "Common PC Protection" category of sampples are VERY GOOD in my mind. No really weak area with TrendMicro, congrats!

    If I remember right, Trend is also a very light on resources, if so, a good choice of those who want some light av.

    PS. It may score even better with those AdWare samples, but I understood that the Spyware detection module is ON only during On-Access scanning.

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Mar 29, 2005
  17. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I wonder why everyone write Pc-cillian instead Pc-cillin. Or McCaffee instead McAfee ;) I also expected more from Pc-cillin,but it doesn't look too good here... :doubt:
     
  18. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    Although Kaspersky engined av:s are nr. 1 in detection, they are a bit away from top in disinfection capabilities. You can check that from here and some former tests in here too.

    http://www.checkvir.com/index.php?CN=3.3.35&CIE=0

    Trend has won several "Adwanced" certificates concerning disinfection in here.

    Btw, I have scanned AntiVir 6.30 too, it scored totally 3234, but I just can't find ONE sample, in which catecory AntiVir detected that before I have counted all these 3649 samples manually from scanlog, very frustrating. o_O

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2005
  19. dread

    dread Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Posts:
    195
    If your talking about the internet suite, mcafee all the way. I cant stand trend's firewall, it doesnt fully allow programs to access the internet. You cant use remote destop or realvnc even if you make a rule for them. They also dont have a chance against mcafee spamkiller. But besides that pc-cillin is ok besides the false positives it has sometimes. But every company has them.
     
  20. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Y'know - there's something wrong. MicroWorld's eScan (KAV engine) was tested only once recently at Checkvir, however it got the advanced award o_O

    Same engine = same disinfection

    RIGHT?

    <or is it some not-so-clean thing going on>

    Firecat
     
  21. Piper

    Piper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Posts:
    34
    Location:
    California, USA
    Ok, probably a stupid question, but.......Everytime I see one of Firefighter's tests, or Bigc's posts, it has McAfee VSE 8.0i. Is that the Enterprise edition? I thought that wasn't available to the average end user consumer.
     
  22. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Umm...some companies hand the Enterprise edition to their employees for home use :)
     
  23. Piper

    Piper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Posts:
    34
    Location:
    California, USA


    Ahh. Makes sence. :) Thanks Firecat.
     
  24. .....

    ..... Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Posts:
    312
    Warez Monkeys :ninja:
     
  25. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    Actually the former eScan Free 4.4.7 was able to rename/delete almost all infected files but not CLEAN. Don't know about the commercial version.

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. Ibrad
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    2,420
  2. chabbo
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,071
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.