PauloPires Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Hello!!I would like to know of some very good antivirus for Windows XP Pro x64, like Norton or McAfee (Including both of these 2). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 (edited) Norton (2006) and McAfee (2006) aren't good AV at all for two main reasons:1. They are very heavy on system resources. Both in their GUI (<Screenshot) and processes/services.Screenshots:Processes while Idle (just running in the background, not scanning)Processes after a full system scanServicesNow compare those with these following screenshots from Kaspersky and NOD32:KasperskyMain GUIProcesses, er, process rather while IdleAfter a full system scanNOD32Main GUIScanning GUIScanning Options 1Scanning Options 2Processes While IdleProcesses After Full System ScanNow why have such an unnecessarily massive application installed when a smaller one that takes up much less memory and has a more compact and organized GUI can defend against viruses better?2. They do have good detection rates, however, are not good at actually removing viruses.Sure, they have the money to market their products so everyone knows about them, and they may very well be the pioneers of the anti-virus industry that paved the way for future products, but far more efficient products have stepped up to the plate.Kaspersky and NOD32 are the two very best anti-virus products when taking the following into consideration:a. GUIb. Ease of usec. memory footprintd. Filesizee. Featuresf. Detection ratesThey have both recently, within the last week, come out with final new versions which fully support x64. Try these out, update them, and configure them to their maximum scanning capability. I hope you find satisfaction with one or the other. For more info on anti-virus, anti-spyware, the current and future threats to PCs, follows the following links for an abundance of info:http://www.av-comparatives.orghttp://www.virusbtn.com Edited November 23, 2006 by Jeremy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPires Posted November 23, 2006 Author Share Posted November 23, 2006 Thank You very much for that information.What about Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition v10.2.199, is this one any good? It doesn't look as heavy as the other Norton antivirus.Norton (2006) and McAfee (2006) aren't good AV at all for two main reasons:1. They are very heavy on system resources. Both in their GUI (<Screenshot) and processes/services.Screenshots:Processes while Idle (just running in the background, not scanning)Processes after a full system scanServicesNow compare those with these following screenshots from Kaspersky and NOD32:KasperskyMain GUIProcesses, er, process rather while IdleAfter a full system scanNOD32Main GUIScanning GUIScanning Options 1Scanning Options 2Processes While IdleProcesses After Full System ScanNow why have such an unnecessarily massive application installed when a smaller one that takes up much less memory and has a more compact and organized GUI can defend against viruses better?2. They do have good detection rates, however, are not good at actually removing viruses.Sure, they have the money to market their products so everyone knows about them, and they may very well be the pioneers of the anti-virus industry that paved the way for future products, but far more efficient products have stepped up to the plate.Kaspersky and NOD32 are the two very best anti-virus products when taking the following into consideration:a. GUIb. Ease of usec. memory footprintd. Filesizee. Featuresf. Detection ratesThey have both recently, within the last week, come out with final new versions which fully support x64. Try these out, update them, and configure them to their maximum scanning capability. I hope you find satisfaction with one or the other. For more info on anti-virus, anti-spyware, the current and future threats to PCs, follows the following links for an abundance of info:http://www.av-comparatives.orghttp://www.virusbtn.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 What about Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition v10.2.199, is this one any good? It doesn't look as heavy as the other Norton antivirus.As I do not have Vista, I am unable to test the v10.2.199 release.I can, however, provide information on v10.1.5.5000 for XP x86/x64.Screenshots:Processes (Before Scan, Running in the background)Processes (After full system scan)Services (Not configured, left as default)Main GUIDetails of completed scanWithin the program:Scanning OptionsScanning Options - AdvancedAuto-Protect - Advanced OptionsE-Mail Auto-ProtectE-Mail Protect - Advanced OptionsHeuristic Scanning OptionsTamper ProtectionPre-installation filesize - 33.4 MB (35,033,088 bytes)Post-installation filesize - 114 MB (119,566,336 bytes) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dash_wag Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 the best anti virus to use on any of the windows operating systems is Avast anti virus, it updates every day, picks up every known virus, u can do a dos based scan on boot so it guarentees virus removal, i work for a computer company and we fix 30 systems a day many of witch have virus problems and this removes everything with a boot time scan and seems to even pick up viruses that kapersky, panda, norton, mcaffe, avg and many other progs seem to miss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 I like Bitdefender, but no any solution available for Win XP x64 at current............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaqie Fox Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 the best anti virus to use on any of the windows operating systems is Avast anti virus, it updates every day, picks up every known virusnot according to many leading testing sites, it doesn't. nothing does.http://wiki.castlecops.com/AntiVirus_Comparison, u can do a dos based scan on boot so it guarentees virus removal, i work for a computer company and we fix 30 systems a day many of witch have virus problems and this removes everything with a boot time scan and seems to even pick up viruses that kapersky, panda, norton, mcaffe, avg and many other progs seem to missIt also has the highest "false detection" rate of any antivirus program on the market, free or not. Avast! is not "the best" it is simply "good". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluberti Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 I prefer Symantec corporate or CA's eTrust product, but you'll get all kinds of responses to a question like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 I prefer Symantec corporate or CA's eTrust product Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluberti Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 ? I'm interested in performance and reliability, and those two products (believe it or not) work absolutely great on x64 if you use the right versions . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 Well, suit yourself but I've tested multiple versions of Symantec, but not the latter, and was not impressed. Kaspersky and NOD32 offer reliability and performance as well, for a fraction of the harddrive space and memory requirements of Symantec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluberti Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 If you're running an x64 version of Windows and are worried about memory requirements, that seems silly to me. But, to each his or her own - like I said before, this kind of question will get all kinds of responses, with no "right" answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 If you're running an x64 version of Windows and are worried about memory requirements, that seems silly to me.I'm not running x64. The reason why memory usage concerns me particularly regarding anti-virus software is, why use a bloated piece of software that installs 100-200 MBs of files on your system and takes up 100 MBs of memory when another program has a higher detection rate, works harder to remove viruses and uses less filesize and memory?I'm not speaking of exact numbers, just generalizing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimy Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 If you're running an x64 version of Windows and are worried about memory requirements, that seems silly to me.I'm not running x64. The reason why memory usage concerns me particularly regarding anti-virus software is, why use a bloated piece of software that installs 100-200 MBs of files on your system and takes up 100 MBs of memory when another program has a higher detection rate, works harder to remove viruses and uses less filesize and memory?I'm not speaking of exact numbers, just generalizing.I agree 100%. Norton and Mcafee don't have good detection rates to begin with. There is no point of giving your antivirus that much resources if it is going to be terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinodh Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 I prefer Mcafee Enterprise 8.5 for everything: XP, Server, x64 etc. Works fine for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now