Bitdefender

Has anyone used this? Is it light on resources?

 

it's a very good program, but no, not light on resources...........

 

No, not light on resources at all. If you're going to pay for AV, get NOD32 or Kaspersky AV. I personally love NOD32 because it's the lightest on resources and is as good as, or maybe even better than Kaspersky AV when it comes to the engine.

 

Thanks, the only reason I am asking is I got Trend Micro with my Dell's and I really don't like it. Any other suggestions? How about firewalls?

 

For firewall, the best one out there is Comodo Firewall Pro, and thankfully it's free. You might need the relief on your wallet after paying for NOD32.

 

Does anyone just use the Vista firewall and windows defender along with an antivirus program?

 

Some do, but it's not generally a good idea if you want to be secure. Also, after installing Comodo and NOD32, you'll definitely want to disable Vista firewall and Windows defender completely, unless you don't want the big speed improvements you'll get.

 

Bitdefender has gotten rave reviews from some. In fact, some have it ranked higher than the favorites, Kaspersky and NOD32 (it really is a toss-up between these two and comes down, ultimately, to personal preference). One clear advantage to choosing Bitdefender is that you'll save a lot of money if you compare them to the two giants. The feature set of Bitdefender is highly regarded. I don't know much about its resource consumption, though. Ultimately, Bitdefender may not turn out to be a bad choice. If you opt to go away from it, however, you really can't go wrong with NOD32 or Kaspersky.

Calvin, I've heard good things about Windows Defender. Was I mislead?

 

I get all my info from here about Bitdefender and stuff. I personally use NOD32, and Windows defender is "okay" at best but if you want secure security then you'll use something else.

 

What about ESET Smart Security? It has firewall and NOD32.

 

Even though they make good anti-virus, i wouldn't put it past them to make a not so perfect firewall. You might be better off with Comodo Pro firewall.

 

Do you just install the basic firewall with Comodo or do you also use defense+?

 

I use the basic firewall most of the time but sometimes i use D+ too.

 

This question is for Baserk or Calvin, do either of you think that I would be better off turning off the firewall feature on my Kaspersky Internet Security suite and just letting the other stuff run (AV and spyware) while installing Comodo?

 

Let me ask you guys this....I was running Bitdefender Total Sec and Counterspy together, but didnt like the lag, so I dropped down to Bitdefender AV and Counterspy, but I'm woundering would I be better to drop counterspy totally and just run Bitdefender Total Sec alone, which includes all of counterspy but also a firewall?

 

I'd say that running the complete Kaspersky Suite is sufficient protection.
The Kaspersky firewall scores a 'very good/85%' score in the latest Matousec leak test. I wouldn't take another look at the Comodo score.
Really, you have bought one of the best security suites available, use all of it!
Cheers.

 

Do you mean Bitdefender is Counterspy including a firewall or something else??

If I were you, I'd drop Counterspy completely and use only BitDefender Total Security.
Cheers.

 

That's strange, I find BD to be one of the lightest on resources. I'm currently using BD Total Security 2008, for startup processes, these are the following:

bdagent.exe - 1,696 KB memory usage
xcommsvr.exe - 284 KB
livesrv.exe - 1,476 KB
vsserv.exe - 3,332 KB

That's total of less than 7 MB in memory usage. There was also the IEShow.exe for Antiphishing Helper, but I removed it from startup since I don't need it, either way that's very small process also.

The other day I installed the latest version 3.0 of NOD32 on my cousin's laptop since that's what they bought, it used more memory for its processes iirc. Maybe someone with the latest NOD32 3.0 can post some numbers to compare? NOD32 is pretty good too, but I'm not sure if it actually uses less resources than BD.

CajunCARTFan, I've been using BD products for many years, never had any problem or infection. But like all AV products, everyone has different experience.

 

Like Baserk said, I'd drop Counterspy completely, there is no point of running so many real-time anti-spyware clients.

EDIT: I just noticed that this thread was created back in March 2008, lol.

 

Indeed

 

No, I've heard that it is resource-intensive. If you want something light, look into Kaspersky or NOD32.

 

well..u where right, I dropped BitDef and Counterspy and am just running Kaspersky Internet Sec, and it runs everything at a fraction of the resource usage of BitDef. Scans are quicker, smoother, and I hardly even notice its on my comp. Good suggestion, thx

 

Yeah, I never have to mess with Kaspersky. I installed and configured it on the first day and really never messed with it since. It does its thing and I do mine.

 

May I ask why when you used BD, you insisted on keeping Counterspy while BD already has its own antispyware, but with Kaspersky you don't mind running it alone?

To be fair, please install Counterspy while using Kaspersky at the same time, I'd bet it was Counterspy that was giving you the conflict when you used BD.

 

I would say your assumption is correct, except that I give each program testing in my own eyes. I removed counterspy and ran bitdefender total alone, there was still a lag in my comp and the proformance monitor show that the cpu and disk where still getting hit hard but a program that says its not resource intensive. Then i ran counterspy alone, and it showed hardly any affect on the computer at all. Finally i installed Kaspersky Internet Sec and ran that with counterspy no lag from either programs, but i decided that this was still over kill and uninstalled counterspy. My comp with every option of security running in KIS shows nothing on CPU usage, and hadly a peak in Disk. For me, KIS speakes for itself and I've given Bit a more than fair chance to prove itself. Thanks, but no thanks, you can keep Bitdef...hell, i'll even send you my copy.

 

Ah, ok... sorry I didn't know you tested it without Counterspy.

lol about the copy.

 

no worries, i always test before i post, b/c a lot of people post about what the "believe" to be true, and it can really mess with the systems of people that dont know a thing and just trust us b/c we post alot.

As for your profile pic...u ride? I have GSXR-1000..cant live without them

 

Nice! Yeah been riding for many years now, currently 02 and 04 R1s, but I think one of them will have to go soon, the insurance is killing me.

In 2001, I had the 01 GSX-R750 for a year before getting the 02 R1. The GSX-R is good bike, but the reach/size is a bit big in that generation. I love the 2006 GSX-R1000 though, so freaking small, even smaller/lower than the R1.

 

I hear you, I had a really hooked up 04 gsxr1000, but sold it and now have an 06 1000..believe it or not, only has 1200 miles on it. haha never have time for it these days. I raced when i was younger and miss it like crazy