• 0

Your favourite Antivirus?


  

2295 members have voted

  1. 1. Your favourite Antivirus?

    • Avast!
      193
    • AVG
      306
    • BitDefender
      42
    • Kaspersky
      261
    • McAfee
      154
    • NOD32
      633
    • Norton/Symantec
      435
    • Panda
      29
    • Trend Micro
      81
    • Other
      161


Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

I used to run AVG and I hated the interface. Slow and UGLY. Now it is better looking but still slow...

I have Antivir. No useless junk. Just monitor and scanner. Constant updates. Very professional looking program.

(the germans know what they are doing)

  • 0
Nod32, because it works, it's routinely updated, and most importantly, it leaves me alone and doesn't add any stupid sh*t that I don't want/need.  No firewall/popupblocker/spam scanner/car washer or any crap like that.  Just a nice, small virus scanner.

586334760[/snapback]

That's why I like NOD32. :yes:

  • 0
That's why I like NOD32. :yes:

586346811[/snapback]

My vote goes for NOD32 as well. Best antivirus scanner around, in terms of virus detection vs system resources. If you want the VERY best scanner around, get Kaspersky, but be prepared for it to slow your system down as much (if not more) than that Norton crap. And I do mean CRAP.

If you're just looking for a free antivirus program, then go for antivir or AVG. But if you're going to pay for an antivirus program, at least pay for something that works = NOD32.

Don't take our words for it though, check out the Virus Bulletin website. NOD32 has the best overall track record for detecting "in the wild" virii :yes:

  • 0
im running bitdefender and kaspersky presonal at the same time =/

is that okay?

oh, and i did a virus scan yesterday, took me 5-6 hours.  :angry:

the thing is, it scanned an archive of adware se personal, and it was password protected to scan.

except i wasnt that at the time when the scan stopped and asked me to skip the archive.

but still, that wudda only saved 15 minutes.

shud it take that long to scan my computer? ( around 160gigs..)

586316369[/snapback]

No dude, it shouldn't take that long at all. You're problem is that you're running two separate AV programs at once, which is strongly urged against by all AV companies. They can and will interfere with each other, slowing your system down and could possibly even cause lock-ups & crashes. Id choose one and stick with it. Both of those programs are great, but I think you should take a look at NOD32 :yes:

Keep reading around on these boards, you'll find MANY people who've grown to love it. Don't get me wrong, it's not perfect - no AV program is - but it's damn close. I'm not usually vocal about a product unless I'm absolutely sure it's worth it. And if that's not enough evidence for you, check out the virus bulletin website & other AV review sites. They all agree :D

  • 0

I've tried pretty much all of them,for somethin to do, and I chose Avast, cuz I use Avast Pro.

Second choice would probably a toss between McAfee and Trend Micro.

Worst in my opinion would definitely be Norton's. Can't remember if F-Secure was listed, but that one is awful too.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Valve finally confirms Steam Machine prices, starts at $1049 for 512GB option by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe The $1,428 option The Steam Hardware lineup that Valve announced last year is slowly starting to roll out. Following the recent Steam Controller launch, Valve has now confirmed the price of the Steam Machine, its all-in-one console-like solution for PC gaming in the living room. There are currently four variants being presented, with only the storage and the included controller being the biggest differences. All of the Steam Machines have the same internals consisting of a semi-custom AMD Zen 4 CPU with six cores and 12 threads, an RDNA 3 28CU GPU, 16GB of DDR5 memory, and 8GB of GDDR6 VRAM, all inside the familiar box Valve has been showing off for months now. The Steam Machine base model starts at $1,049. This has a 512GB NVMe SSD but does not come with a Steam Controller. Keep in mind that storage can be expanded with the microSD card slot too. Next, the $1,128 model has the exact same storage as the previous one but it does come with the new Steam Controller. If you need the Steam Machine to have more storage for games and apps than that, then the 2TB tiers are also available. The $1,349 Steam Machine has no controller once again, but it does ship with two extra faceplates (red fabric and solid walnut) to replace the standard black one. The final option costs $1,428, and it adds the controller back into the bundle. The Steam Machine ships with the Linux-based SteamOS. The box has a 1 Gigabit Ethernet port, DisplayPort 1.4, and HDMI 2.0, as well as one USB-C and four USB-A ports. Keep in mind that when purchasing standalone, the Steam Controller has a $100 price tag. With the above bundles, that drops to $80. It's a rather expensive machine for the internals it is touting, though the design and small form factor do help it somewhat. However, at the same time, the lack of upgradability hurts it. Valve says the ongoing parts shortages and massive price hikes for memory were the leading causes for this price. "The overall effect is that our original goal for the price of Steam Machine is no longer viable," added the company. "So the prices we're sharing today reflect the state of the world for manufacturing; or, more accurately, it reflects the price of the components as we've secured them over the past 6 months." Valve wants interested gamers to reserve it now to get the chance to pre-order a Steam Machine starting June 25, with shipping starting on June 29. Head here to sign up. The invites to buy it will be sent in a randomized order.
    • What the press release doesn’t mention, however, is how much water the natural gas plant itself will consume, Natural gas plants use about 2,803 gallons of water per megawatt-hour produced, which is significantly less than coal-fired plants that use around 19,185 gallons per megawatt-hour. Overall, natural gas plants are more water-efficient, using 584% less water than traditional power plants on average. AI generated
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      516
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      203
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      97
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      neufuse
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!