Well I have switched from MSE back to NOD32

[Subject Delta]

Memory usage on MSE is a bit higher than when I used to use avast, but I haven't had any of the CPU usage issues you experienced, and my CPU is inferior to yours. Also, the thing that puts me off using NOD32 is that (apart from the fact its free VS not free) its detection rates haven't been overly wonderful, last time it was tested, it was only in the low 80% region compared to 94 or something like that for Kaspersky

[dead.cell]

The lowest machine I've installed MSE on is a Celery 1.4Ghz and 512MB of RAM. It did slow the machine down a bit, but it was still usable. Even with the slowdown, I'd still install it over AVG, Avira, and Avast. Why you ask?

AVG - LOL

Avira - Stupid Ad and sometimes has problems with false positives

Avast - Its actually ok, but I don't really understand the need for a new free key once per year. I get sick of trying to explain to people how to get a new key only to say eff it and go do it for them.

I'm running the current MSE Beta (1743) and so far, not alot has changed in MSE yet. They need to seriously improve the full scan time along with the CPU usage as Warwagon mentioned. Kaspersky used to be my AV of choice, but got tired of its stupid little quirks and the little problems it caused here and there with basic OS operation.

Yeah, I actually liked Avast for the fact that it's detection rates were good compared to AVG or Avira when I needed something removed off of my grandmother's computers, along with a few friends of the family. Picked up stuff that AVG missed. Not my favorite though simply because of how it looks and functions. From what I remember, the scanner imitated a "media player" even, which I found to be a bit questionable when all I want is a simple anti-virus for people that aren't the most computer literate. Makes my life easier in being able to demonstrate, educate, and saves me minutes on my cellphone even. :p

I didn't know there was a new beta version of MSE out though. Any notable changes that you're aware of?

[nokiaxion]

I was going to run MSE on a PC but this changed my mind.

NOD32 2.7 FTW.

[ccoltmanm]

I was going to run MSE on a PC but this changed my mind.

NOD32 2.7 FTW.

Why 2.7?

I run MSE, and it works. That's all there is too it. I have 4gig system, so, does it really matter?

[Guest xiphi]

I run MSE on both my laptop and desktop and have never had any issues with it. No slow downs or high CPU usage. I can't even tell it's there.

[red.]

Does MSE use the same engine as OneCare?

I only ask because i thought that OneCare wasn't very good.

[Elliot B.]

I don't know about you mate, but I can easily say I have installed MSE on 18 computers and none of them are showing any signs of MSE hogging down the system. The lowest system i installed MSE on is a Pentium III 550mhz i think and 256MB, there was no slow down what so ever.

I've installed it on various systems, including ones similar to that low-specced machine, and I also experienced no slow-down at all. It's also very efficient and scores highly on virus-attacking tests etc.

[protocol7]

Not to mention the huge update definitions windows

You can set the update windows to invisible. Then you don't see them at all.

[Ricardo Gil]

The CPU usage is sometimes noticeable, but nothing out of the ordinary.

I'll just leave a quick tip to those who are using MSE within Windows 7:

If you usually connect to windows shares within your network (\\serverx\\whatever), do not run full scans.

Select custom instead and check the drives you want to scan. There's a bug that makes MSE scan previously accessed locations, even if they're not mapped to a drive.

[_V_]

last time it was tested, it was only in the low 80% region compared to 94 or something like that for Kaspersky

I don't know where you got that information, but all the known AV tests (av-comparatives.org, virus bulletin, malware research group...) show that Nod32 is ahead of Kaspersky and surpassed only by a few other engines in some specific tests (on-demand mainly). For the record, Kaspersky has been falling down the list since the beginning of this year in terms of performance, RAP tests, on-demand... etc.

[Fluxii Media]

No idea how anyone can dislike this program... it's using 40MB of RAM now... which is literally nothing on most computers anyways... and I have it on my Dad's old computer, no problems, never even notices he has it on 90% of the time.

I recommend this program to all my friends, not one has had a problem.

[episode]

When it comes to free protection, I think MSE is the best I've come across. AVG Home use to be decent but is now very sluggish and the ads are annoying. All the free ones I think have ads or at least nag screens to upgrade to their pay-for editions.

What I want is an antivirus that responds when a virus is found, deletes the virus and then puts a big message on my screen that says something along the lines us: "Threat Eliminated! Your system is now 100% virus free!"

Seems like whenever a virus is found you can delete the file or put it in a virus vault...but there is never a definitive "you are no longer infected" message to give me a nice warm feeling. I'm always left feeling paranoid.

Because what if it missed something. It can tell you it eliminated that file, but there is no way to guarantee it didn't miss something else.

[master2k27]

should of went to norton

[+Warwagon MVC]

should of went to norton

I will agree the new norton is pretty light and runs great, but i've used nod32 for years.

[soldier1st]

mse has not been too good for me as out of like 5 pcs only 1 works good with it and it was an older one yet on a faster one mse chugged along and slowed all down so i had to remove it and the speed is back.

[+Warwagon MVC]

I was just finishing my sisters laptop. I still have MSE installed on it. I was installing Office 2007 on it and MSE was taking up between 20 to 67% CPU during the install of Office 2007.

[Saint Shiv]

Does MSE use the same engine as OneCare?

I only ask because i thought that OneCare wasn't very good.

Forefront

I was just finishing my sisters laptop. I still have MSE installed on it. I was installing Office 2007 on it and MSE was taking up between 20 to 67% CPU during the install of Office 2007.

So it was doing its job, which would be scanning while something is installing?

[+Warwagon MVC]

This is Microsoft Security Essentials during the install of Office 2007 Service pack 2 on a customers laptop.

[Growled Member]

Wow, that's some serious memory usage. Not sure why but MSE has run great here, and I haven't seen any of that.

[dead.cell]

This is Microsoft Security Essentials during the install of Office 2007 Service pack 2 on a customers laptop.

<snip>

Joking aside, you must have the worst luck. Are you using the same install as you used elsewhere? Is it the release version? Did you get it straight from Microsoft? Have you tried downloading and installing another downloaded copy?

Just a thought because out of the 80+ computers I've done this on, I've yet to see your results much less hear any complaints. :/

[san.W10]

i always turn off MSE when i''m installing a game or s/w.

right now, I'm copying videos from handy cam. but i dont think MSE is scanning anything right now. 35MB @idle :D

recently when i tried to install HP printer drivers, the installation stalled at 60% (step 3/4) for more than 20mins., turning off MSE didnt help, i had to kill the install to & re-install the drivers.

btw, why is there so many svchost files open :/ , how many does MSE open?

[+Warwagon MVC]

Joking aside, you must have the worst luck. Are you using the same install as you used elsewhere? Is it the release version? Did you get it straight from Microsoft? Have you tried downloading and installing another downloaded copy?

Just a thought because out of the 80+ computers I've done this on, I've yet to see your results much less hear any complaints. :/

Funny thing is, its someones elses computer not my own. I got it from Microsoft, the release version and its a clean install of windows.

I've installed it on a bunch of computers ,never really been happy with the memory or CPU usage. As to the guy who installed it on his PII with 256 meg of ram. I would never install MSE on anything less than 512. Let alone a PII, they don't have much CPU usage to work with let alone having MSE take up 70% of it while installing an application. I just think its also a CPU hog while doing any kind of scanning. It's not like i'm trying ot hate it. I really wanted to be impressed.

[ADSfull]

Funny thing is, its someones elses computer not my own. I got it from Microsoft, the release version and its a clean install of windows.

I've installed it on a bunch of computers ,never really been happy with the memory or CPU usage. As to the guy who installed it on his PII with 256 meg of ram. I would never install MSE on anything less than 512. Let alone a PII, they don't have much CPU usage to work with let alone having MSE take up 70% of it while installing an application. I just think its also a CPU hog while doing any kind of scanning. It's not like i'm trying ot hate it. I really wanted to be impressed.

maybe XP is the problem!

MSE slows me down only when i open the download folder, where i have a lot of downloads

[jimbo11883]

i always turn off MSE when i''m installing a game or s/w.

right now, I'm copying videos from handy cam. but i dont think MSE is scanning anything right now. 35MB @idle :D

recently when i tried to install HP printer drivers, the installation stalled at 60% (step 3/4) for more than 20mins., turning off MSE didnt help, i had to kill the install to & re-install the drivers.

btw, why is there so many svchost files open :/ , how many does MSE open?

I think that after Windows XP, Microsoft split services up into more svchosts, so that in the event that a service host crashed, it wouldn't take out so many other services.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

I'm not sure what you're machines are getting hit with. I can't seem to find anything wrong with MSE.

I noticed you showing a pic of it chewing up over 55% of the CPU when install Office 2007 SP2. I'm installing CoD World at War and it seems to be choking up no CPU cycles at all. Maybe it is my quad core? I expected to see ~25% CPU usage from it (100% on a comparable single core machine)... Getting ~0% was a shocker.

I'll look again when patching up since that would be more similar to your case.