nod32 anti-virus 64bit

[dale5605]

yes avast has been around for longer, but it doesn't have the track record of nod32 in respect of detection of most recent threats and very low false alarms, also i have 2gig of ram, so i'm not concerned about mem hungry applications, i use sandra to benchmark my system before and after installing new programs to see if any performance has been lost or gained. see for ur self, install 30day free trial and compare to avast, i bet nod32 finds threats that avast cant. B)

Actually recently avast has been very good. I am convinced by what you say that you have not even given the new avast a try at all, so your comments are pretty much moot. If you check Virus Bulletin avast got the 100% award many times over the past few months, they failed a lot in the past yes but they have made huge improvements and now they detect threats as good as any other including nod.

And avast is definitely not a memory hog, I don't know if it uses less than nod or not but it seems slim and fast to me. And I have gotten zero false alarms.

And about installing nod32 and seeing if it finds threats, well I've already tried nod32 several times along with others. But they never find threats anyways since I don't go downloading weird stuff or getting viruses.

[j0j081]

And about installing nod32 and seeing if it finds threats, well I've already tried nod32 several times along with others. But they never find threats anyways since I don't go downloading weird stuff or getting viruses.

Yeah I haven't seen a virus in a couple years at least. If you know what your doing on the Internet, it's 90% of the battle.

[cluberti]

That's the hardest part about making the internet secure - most people think security is something you can buy, rather than something you practice. The A/V and antispyware vendors make a killing because the earth contains a vastly uneducated user base, security-wise.

And since most people now consider a PC an appliance, rather than a tool, this isn't going to ever improve - it's become to be thought of in the same vein as a refrigerator or stove for most people.

[Jito463]

I don't like to do this, but I'll bust out my "credibility" stick - I work for MS Support at the highest levels in Core OS platform support, and I can tell you that NOD32 uses almost as much memory as the absolute worst, McAfee 8 (although SAV 9.x and older are right behind - SAV10 with the latest update runs entirely in paged pool, which is much better). NOD32 installations can have serious issues in nonpaged pool usage on "power-user" and server-class systems, that to my knowledge have not been fixed for quite some time.

It should be OK on a 64bit system (where nonpaged pool is now 128GB rather than 256MB or 128MB), but it's still not a very well-written product, memory-wise.

And yes, it does install to "program files (x86)" by default, meaning it's still a 32bit application.

Can you backup your claims? Because without proof, your "credibility stick" is about as strong as a wet noodle. I've installed NOD32 across multiple systems (trial version as I work for a system builder), and have used it personally on both my home and work machine through 32-bit and 64-bit installs (and I do consider myself a "power-user" as you put it), and we also use it on almost all our machines at work. You so-called serious issues have never arisen for me on any of the aforementioned machines. Do you have any evidence to display or are you just trying to blow smoke up our USB ports?

[cluberti]

All I can say is that I work for Microsoft, in Core OS support, and have for many years. Past that, I can't put case information on the 'net - suffice to say, almost ALL A/V products all have issues (although I'd say McAfee was the worst) with using more than their fair share of kernel memory resources, and NOD32 is no different. And rarely do I blow anything up anyone's USB ports, short of compressed air when cleaning the innards of a PC.

It's great that you have had no problems, but you not having problems doesn't mean others do not or will not. Again, 64bit Windows alleviates some of the kernel memory resource issues, but not all.

Edited January 19, 2006 by cluberti

[Jito463]

Nice. I like how you side-step the issue. Of course no software is perfect and that some people are inevitably going to have issues. But I was asking you to point to articles or some sort of evidence that shows what you were stating above to be your "credibility stick". Has no one done any articles testing this problem to prove your point? I'm just asking for some white papers or at least some tests done by a reliable source. Do you have any links at all?

[cluberti]

I don't have anything public on Microsoft's site that I can point you to, as I only have internal PSS support incident cases that contain this data. No antivirus vendor is going to publish issues like this on it's website, either.

You can call me out all you'd like, but I'm not sidestepping the issue. I'd like to produce data to back up my position, but I'd likely be let go for doing so, and I'd rather not. You can believe me, you can not believe me - it really doesn't matter to me, and changes my opinion of NOD32 not a bit. I believe it to be a program that uses far too much kernel memory resources, and I've seen data with my own eyes attesting to the problems it can cause (and it's not alone - most A/V packages use far too much kernel resources when in use). Again, believe me or don't believe me, it's your choice. Use NOD32 if you like it as well, I'm not here to advocate one product over another - they're all equally bad.

Edited January 19, 2006 by cluberti

[Jito463]

Well, I just find it a little hard to believe that no one else has reported on this considering how long you say it's been a "problem". You would think by now that *someone* would have done a study on it. But since you refuse to provide any support for your claims, I guess we'll just leave it at that and go our merry ways.

[cluberti]

Fine by me. I still stand by my claims, but I feel you probably do too - I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this.

Edit: slightly OT - did you know there's a KB article that goes along with the link in your sig?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

Edited January 20, 2006 by cluberti

[prathapml]

@Jito

Please check out cluberti's post in detail. He is NOT saying that NOD32 is a memory hog on the whole. He is talking about KERNEL RESOURCE usage....

Thats a serious issue indeed, and if you remember, thats what brought down the stability of the win9x-series (they had very limited kernel resources & all apps ate it up constantly). I dont remember where I read it, but I'm convinced of what cluberti said above.

[Jito463]

I read his post, and understand perfectly what he's saying. And I'm not saying he's wrong either, as I have no proof either way. What I was asking for was some evidence that proves his point, which he not only failed to provide but adamently refused to. I tend to question anyone that won't back up their claims.

[saugatak]

I don't like to do this, but I'll bust out my "credibility" stick - I work for MS Support at the highest levels in Core OS platform support, and I can tell you that NOD32 uses almost as much memory as the absolute worst, McAfee 8 (although SAV 9.x and older are right behind - SAV10 with the latest update runs entirely in paged pool, which is much better). NOD32 installations can have serious issues in nonpaged pool usage on "power-user" and server-class systems, that to my knowledge have not been fixed for quite some time.

This is news to me. I've tried out a lot of AV apps and Nod32 has always been the fastest and lightest. Hmm, looks like I'll have to do some testing.

BTW, before M$ got into AV apps, didn't you guys use Nod32?

Edit: Mr. Cluberti may be right. All you have to do is go into Task Manager without Nod32 running and with Nod32 running and you'll see that a lot of kernel resources are being used by Nod32.

Edited January 20, 2006 by saugatak

[prathapml]

some evidence that proves his point, which he not only failed to provide but adamently refused to.

Well, he is probably bound by contract to not reveal internal findings.

But I do know that I've seen NOD32 unstable sometimes. Also, its quite a decent AV, but I hope they clean up the interface/settingsUI though - its messy currently.

@saugatak:

Ah, thanks for checking it out!

I did not have NOD32 installed, and cluberti seems to have FORGOT that he could simply post a taskmanager scrshot of nod32 & SAV10, for proof.

[cluberti]

I could've done that, but I don't have a box with NOD32 running on it at the moment. I actually thought of that this morning on my way into work, but it's been busy. And yes, I've got contractual obligations that... prevent me from posting internal Microsoft documents. It's OK though, I don't take it personally, and I always believe everyone has a right to their opinions, whether I agree with them or not (and vice-versa). Thanks for the vote of confidence, though, I do appreciate it .

I love Fridays.

[Link21]

What cluberti says is news to me as well. I have tried many AV software and NOD32 seems by far the least resource hog to me. Norton, McAfee, Panda, and others all seem to hog a lot of system resources.

NOD32 seemed by far the best and didn't seem to slow my system down at all. All other AV products I hve used seemed to slow my system down a lot rehardless of how fast and how fast a CPU I had and how much memory I put in my system.

NOD32 also detects vrisues on the fly extremely well. It has cuaght eveyr piece of malware that tried to hit me when browsing the web.

You say that all AV software has serious problems. Well, you miswell use NOD32 because it seems to have the least problems and takes up the least system resources and doesn't slow your PC like most other AV applications.

And can I ask you this. Why is it that NOD32 has a separate version for Windows NT/2000/XP/2003 and Widnows 95/98/ME? But all other AV software uses the same installer and files for both the Windows 9X based OS and the Windows NT based OS? Does it have anything to do with NOD32 integrating itself into the native NT system or native Windows 9X system, and thus requires different versions because Windows 9X and Windows NT are completely different? But all other AV software runs on top of the standard WIN32 external API which is compatible with the same files and installer across both the 9X and NT platform?