Usman(Shanijee) talks Eset about Nod32 v3

Discussion in 'NOD32 version 2 Forum' started by shanijee, Feb 17, 2006.

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

    iNsuRRecTioN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Posts:
    303
    Location:
    Germany
    Re: Usman(Shanijee) talks Eset about Nod32 v3, footprint is high

    Hey,

    details please!

    This would be very good if it is true for mine system, too!

    But on my system, Win2kSP4, 512MB RAM, NOD32v2.5 it need a total of 16-18 MB :(

    best regards,

    iNsuRRecTiON
     
  2. beetlejuice69

    beetlejuice69 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Posts:
    780
    Nod on my machine is Nod32kui=516
    Nod32km=18908
    --------
    Total= 19424
     
  3. LIW

    LIW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    52
    Hi flyrfan111,

    How did u make NOD32 running so low on resources? What about VM size?

    NOD32 on my machine runs
    nod32krn.exe:
    mem usage - 16,448 vm - 15,546

    nod32kui:
    mem usage - 2,860 vm - 2,860

    Thanks

    Regards,
    LIW
     
  4. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,633
    i got this:

    nod32krn.exe - 8,048 mem - 16,760 vm
    nod32kui.exe - 1,976 mem - 4,748 vm

    total - 31,532 mb
     
  5. Brian N

    Brian N Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,174
    Location:
    Denmark
    Just enable 'optimize scanning' in AMON, and it will drop very low.

    Here's a shot about 4 minutes ago:
     

    Attached Files:

  6. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,751
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    There must be other factors that can influence the numbers as well Brian. I have optimize scanning enabled and my numbers are NOD32 krn.exe 17140 and NOD32 kui.exe 512.
     
  7. Brian N

    Brian N Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,174
    Location:
    Denmark
    It takes time though. I guess it only works when it has scanned all files that you use or something.

    It's still the same (almost) on my pc even after a reboot.
     
  8. fosius

    fosius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Posts:
    479
    Location:
    Partizanske, Slovakia
    I had such small memory usage on my old computer where I had 128 MB RAM. Now I have 1 GB RAM and my NOD32 uses:
    nod32kui.exe - 604 K
    nod32krn.exe - 19232 K
     
  9. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,751
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    I'll bet it's consistently in that range give or take a bit, isn't it? With optimize scanning enabled.
     
  10. iNsuRRecTioN

    iNsuRRecTioN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Posts:
    303
    Location:
    Germany
    Hey,

    yes sure, it is!

    I have optimize scanning enabled for a min. of 3 month now..

    But it is definitely/absolute not the lowest footprint! (not anymore..)

    It takes too much memory, they (Eset) have to optimize that, to claim lowest ram usage..

    best regards,

    iNsuRRecTiON
     
  11. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
  12. fosius

    fosius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Posts:
    479
    Location:
    Partizanske, Slovakia
    I see no differencies with optimize scanning enabled or disabled..
     
  13. crystaLity

    crystaLity Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Posts:
    6
    it always depends,

    NOD32KUI.exe ~500K
    NOD32KRN.exe ~15000K,5000K,(...)
     
  14. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    well, generally a total of 17000 K for me. ;)
     
  15. snowbound

    snowbound Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Posts:
    8,723
    Location:
    The Big Smoke
    Just over 13000k here.


    snowbound
     
  16. shanijee

    shanijee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Posts:
    107
    Location:
    Faisalabad(Pakistan)
    here at shanijee
    nod32krn 18152
    nod32kui 24444
    i am the winner
     
  17. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,221
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    For me,

    nod32krn: ~20000K
    nod32kui: ~1400K

    These figures have been recorded while using my Internet browser to browse Wilders', and at the same time playing some music on Windows Media Player and Reading a file on Notepad.
     
  18. Joliet Jake

    Joliet Jake Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    Posts:
    911
    Location:
    Scotland
    20k total here.
     
  19. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,221
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    20 kilobytes? :eek:

    Or is it 20000K? :doubt::)
     
  20. iNsuRRecTioN

    iNsuRRecTioN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Posts:
    303
    Location:
    Germany
    Hey,

    hehe, good comparison, but the time is over, that Kaspersky maintain such a higher memory usage..

    With Kaspersky 2006 products, the ram usage will be under 10 MB and not 15-22 MB like its now with NOD32 v2.x :D :p ;)

    best regards,

    iNsuRRecTiON
     
  21. Elwood

    Elwood Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Posts:
    205
    Location:
    Mis'sippi
    I don't see what the big deal is about memory usage as long as it isn't exorbitant. If it takes a little more memory to scan everything efficiently and thoroughly, it doesn't bother me at all.

    I'm sure KAV and NOD32 work very differently and this is good. It helps make everyone safer when detection is approached differently by many different minds and techniques
     
  22. tuatara

    tuatara Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Posts:
    775
    I am more interrested in the overall Performance impact on my system.
    And how fast the scans are etc.
    Memory usage is not important for me, it has hardly any impact
    even when it doubles.
    Normally you have enough memory in your system,
    memory speed is in Nano-secs , but disk speed is in milli-secs !!! so what about that.
    So it is nice to have a low memory usage, but what about if i want to scan my 400GB disks ?
    and it takes more then a day!
    There are now new systems sold, with 2 GB internal memory and
    More then a terrabyte of diskspace, what do you think will become a bottleneck regarding
    AV performance?
     
  23. Alphalutra1

    Alphalutra1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Posts:
    1,160
    Location:
    127.0.0.0/255.0.0.0
    IMO, it is the CPU usage that is critical. RAM is there to be used. However, if the av uses a ton of the cpu, then your system will drag. NOD has a super speedy scanner which helps reduce its cpu usage. For example, if I have nod with maximum settings(like scan archives and all files with heuristics on), I notice no drag when using Explorer to see my files. With Kaspersky or Bitdefender, my computer stutters and the files take forever to display. Under 20MB is not much at all. Many firewalls take up a lot more than that, and other programs! Disable some services, and you gain the difference in RAM quite easily.

    Alphalutra1
     
  24. iNsuRRecTioN

    iNsuRRecTioN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Posts:
    303
    Location:
    Germany
    Hey,

    so then buy me one, if you have the money, I don't have it!

    This is no way to go and bad reasons and argumentation..:cautious:

    Yes, of course, overall performance is important and the way to go, but then Eset shouldn't claim NOD32 with the smallest footprint/lowest memory usage..:isay: o_O

    There are already other AV apps with lower RAM usage, like AVG or F-Prot and now and in future KIS and KAV 2006 from Kaspersky..

    If Eset can handle it, that NOD32 v3 lower the memory usage and have the fastest overall performance, with an footprint of under 10 MB, this would be very cool and perfect :p :D :D

    thx and best regards,

    iNsuRRecTiON
     
  25. auriell

    auriell Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Posts:
    105
    Location:
    Warsaw, Poland
    iNsuRRecTioN ---> Stop thinking this way. RAM usage differs from system to system. The real RAM usage can be misured on system with at least 512MB-1GB of RAM and no paging file. Your Kaspersky may use less then 10MB of RAM, but 20MB or more of paging file.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.