Which antivirus should you choose? Comparative test of Dr.Web, ESET, Kaspersky and Norton
Today there are many paid and free solutions among antivirus programs. All of them guarantee maximum system protection. This article will review and compare two paid antivirus solutions: Kaspersky Anti-Virus and ESET NOD32.
If we compare Kaspersky and NOD32 in terms of interface convenience, then at first glance it is clear that the main functions of these antiviruses are in a prominent place. If the user needs, for example, to add a folder to antivirus exclusions, he will have to go to additional settings. This situation is observed in Kaspersky and NOD32. The only difference in the interface is the design.
The Kaspersky main menu consists of a list of main tools, buttons "More Tools" and a small settings icon.
The NOD32 main menu consists of several basic functions, and on the side you can find a list of other sections.
And yet in NOD32 the structure of the interface is more obvious.
ESET NOD32 1:0 Kaspersky Anti-Virus
Antivirus protection
The main task of every antivirus is reliable protection. Both antivirus products were scanned by a current archive of 8983 viruses. This method is one of the simplest and is aimed at checking the effectiveness of the anti-virus scanner.
NOD32 completed the task in just 13 seconds, but also showed a not entirely satisfactory result. After scanning 8,573 objects, it identified 2,578 threats. Perhaps this is due to the specifics of the antivirus and it would cope better with active threats.
Kaspersky Anti-Virus scanned the archive for 56 minutes. This is quite long, but the result is better than in NOD32, because it found 8191 threats. This is most of the entire archive.
ESET NOD32 1:1 Kaspersky Anti-Virus
Directions of protection
Antiviruses have similar components. But NOD32 has device control, which allows you to block access to disks, USB drives, etc.
In turn, Kaspersky has an IM antivirus, the task of which is to ensure security in Internet chats.
ESET NOD32 1:2 Kaspersky Anti-Virus
In normal mode, NOD32 consumes very few resources.
Kaspersky is much more power hungry.
When scanning a system, NOD32 places a heavy load on the system at the beginning.
But after a few seconds it reduces the load.
Kaspersky consistently loads the device with these parameters.
ESET NOD32 2:2 Kaspersky Anti-Virus
Additional features
Both antiviruses have their own additional features. For Kaspersky, this includes an on-screen keyboard, recovery after infection, cloud protection, etc.
In GOD32, the tools are aimed more at system analysis.
ESET NOD32 2:3 Kaspersky Anti-Virus
In the end, the victory goes to Kaspersky antivirus, because it is largely aimed at ensuring the security of the device. But which antivirus is worth using, each user decides for himself, because both products are worthy of attention.
Let's say we have 49 copies of current malware, which are 100% known to antiviruses with modern databases. What could these antiviruses have done with them a week ago, when these malware had not yet fallen into the hands of virus analysts? How effective are the heuristics and proactive protection of modern internet security if you test it against real malware? And for this there is no need to invent a time machine at all - we’ll just preserve experimental antiviruses in virtual machines without access to the Internet, and after a week we’ll test them against a collection of the latest malware, which is already detected by these antiviruses with up-to-date databases. But the antiviruses of the past, of course, don’t know about this yet :).
We will use KIS, Dr.Web, ESET and Windows Defender as guinea pigs. All except the last one will run in Win 7. The last one will run under Win 10 - there is hope that the “ten” is better protected and even with a sieve like Defender, viruses will not pass through. Well, let's check.
Once again about testing
Here's what will be checked: detecting the virus, blocking the virus from launching and treating the infection. The first test will be performed with protection disabled - in scanner mode. For the second and third tests, the antivirus monitor will be turned on.
After all this, we will update the database and compare the resulting detection with the previous result. Since there are many viruses, “exhibits” for launch testing will be selected by the antivirus itself. We will launch those viruses that are not removed as a result of the detection test. It is stupid to try to run a virus that is in the antivirus database - any antivirus will block it. The most interesting thing is to launch a virus that is “unfamiliar” to the antivirus.
All viruses in my collection were divided into groups: Backdoor, Worm, Virus, and so on. A list of all “program heroes” will be provided later. As you can see, there is plenty to choose from.
Your ideas
Your ideas inspire us to new research. We have already taken them into account. So keep gushing - comments on the article and are always open to your suggestions for improvements :).
All operating systems are fresh (specially installed for this article), and the Internet was turned off immediately after installing the antivirus so that the databases remained old with a 100% guarantee.
Let's start testing with the well-known Kaspersky Internet Security. As you can see from the screenshot below, the antivirus was installed six days ago (24 days of free use left).
Disable the antivirus, unpack the archive with viruses. We do not activate the antivirus, but we run a custom scan (so that it does not run everything in a row, but concentrates on one folder) and check the Virus folder. I remember once at a gas station they managed to fill a 20-liter canister with 23 liters. So in the case of Kaspersky - in a folder of 49 files, he managed to find 80!
Apparently, several infections are packed into one file and the antivirus displays each of them separately in the list. Let's look at the detailed report.
As can be seen from the screenshot, 45 threats were found (out of 49). For some reason, the Trojan.Win32.Waldek.jsu virus was neither deleted nor quarantined: the antivirus simply did not process it, although it detected it. There are a total of 11 files left in the Virus folder.
Most of the viruses survived in the RansomWare folder. As you can see from the screenshot, files numbered 2, 4, 7 and 8 were not touched by the antivirus at all. It will be interesting to see the detection after updating the databases.
Well, now we activate the protection and try to launch the “surviving” viruses from the Virus folder. I ran the first two files from the RansomWare folder (numbers 2 and 4). File number 2 was recognized as PDM:Trojan.Win32.Generic. The antivirus detected dangerous behavior of the program, “precisely characterizing it as malicious.”
He suggested healing the computer by rebooting. We agree. Treatment began, the antivirus canceled the actions of the malicious program and simultaneously eliminated file number 4.
I didn't like the results of the treatment. After rebooting I didn't get a clean system. Something was trying to boot, and there were files created by the virus on the desktop. The antivirus cleaned up some things, but it seems to me that not everything. Along the way, the antivirus, of course, tries to treat objects created by viruses.
I continue to run files from the RansomWare folder (numbers 7 and 8). Immediately after launching these files, as in the previous case, there was no immediate response from the antivirus, which allows programs to multiply. The antivirus began to respond after the viruses tried to send emails. Nothing worked for them - I have neither an email client nor an Internet connection!
It’s interesting, but Kaspersky anti-virus did not respond to file number 8. Go ahead. From the Scareware subfolder I launch the only file with the same name. I wait a few minutes. There is no reaction from the antivirus, and in the meantime the virus is most likely doing its dark deeds.
From the TrojanCryptor folder I launch a file named TrojanCryptor (1). The cryptographer is the heavy artillery. There was no response from the antivirus either. But a window appeared.
About the ransomware
The Trojan launched, there seemed to be no reaction from the antivirus, but the data remained unencrypted, as was the case with another participant in this test. But one of the antiviruses allowed data encryption, as you will see below.
From the Virus folder I launch files numbered 4 and 8, then from the Worm folder - files 6 and 8. For some reason the first one did not start (mistakes are made not only by developers of ordinary programs, but also by virus writers). But Kaspersky did not react to the second one.
I run a full scan of the computer. Its goal is to identify objects infected with viruses and try to cure the computer. After the reboot, let's see what happened with the antivirus. To be honest, I was not pleased with the results. The antivirus reported that no threats were detected. Although the malware remained on the computer. I didn’t dig deep - I just opened msconfig and looked at the startup list. As you can see, the antivirus didn’t clean out everything.
When I rebooted the computer, Kaspersky reported that it had decided to cure my computer - an active treatment process was detected, as a result of which the Ransomware (8.exe) file, as well as the worm (8.exe) file, were nevertheless deleted.
It looks like it cleaned out some malicious files. After treating the active infection, KIS again reported that there were no threats.
Well, it's time to update the databases. The databases have been updated and the computer has been rebooted. After the reboot, the recovery after infection wizard started, offering to fix some issues. After the wizard works, I reboot the computer again.
The master restored some things, but not others. Yes, autorun is cleared. But not completely - as you can see, there are still those who want to launch. -!RecOveR!* files created throughout the disk were also not deleted.
I give the antivirus another chance and run a full scan again - this time with new databases. No threats were detected; multiple files created by the virus remained on the computer.
Now repeat the detection test. I disable protection, unpack the archive and run a custom scan of the Virus folder. After updating the databases, Kaspersky neutralized all threats (49). In general, what was to be expected, because we specifically included in the test only real malware, known to the “antiviruses of the future.”
Dr.Web Security Space
In the Dr.Web line, we chose a real monster, the installation file of which weighs 466 MB - Security Space. The smaller Katana product wasn't an option because it doesn't have a scanner.
Continuation is available only to subscribers
Option 1. Subscribe to Hacker to read all materials on the site
Subscription will allow you to read ALL paid materials on the site within the specified period.
We accept payments by bank cards, electronic money and transfers from mobile operator accounts.
It is very rare for vendors to radically change the line of their comprehensive antivirus products, but ESET did it anyway.
is a completely new application that has found its niche between a standalone antivirus and ESET NOD32 Smart Security. The product has all the expected security features, but, unfortunately, some of them do not cope with their direct responsibilities.
An annual license of ESET NOD32 Internet Security to protect three computers will cost 1,950 rubles. For comparison, in the US you will have to pay $79.99 for a similar license.
All 5 labs monitored by PCMag include ESET in their testing program. The product scores generally well, although it failed two MRG-Effitas tests. However, these tests do not have a gradation of results, so their weighting factor in calculating the aggregate indicator was reduced. The overall ESET score is 8.8 out of 10
In a test for blocking malicious links, ESET neutralized 89 percent of online threats, which is a good result. Half of the samples were blocked at the network level, and the other half were blocked at the download level.
In the anti-phishing test, the result was disastrous. ESET trailed Norton by 33 percentage points, although it still outperformed all three browsers' built-in filters.
Other General Features
The standalone antivirus includes the HIPS intrusion prevention system. In a test against 30 exploits, ESET detected and blocked more than half of them, which is better than the results of Bitdefender and Kaspersky. Norton blocked two-thirds of the attacks, all of them at the network level.
The sophisticated device monitoring system is more suitable for enterprise environments than for everyday consumers, although the product itself is more aimed at home users. Tech-savvy people can prevent the connection of external devices, including card readers, Bluetooth and external USB devices. You can create exceptions for trusted devices.
On the “Service” page, the user has access to event log files and a list of files added to quarantine. The remaining tools are intended for technical support agents to troubleshoot problems remotely. These utilities include running processes, a graph of file system activity, and a tool for creating system snapshots for later comparison.
Basic firewall
During testing, the firewall correctly switched all system ports to hidden mode and successfully resisted web attacks. However, ESET failed a test that used ping requests - meaning a cybercriminal would be able to figure out the computer's real IP address. Quick Heal Internet Security 17 also failed this test.
Another test of a two-way firewall is to test whether it blocks attempts to abuse network connections. ESET software control can operate in several modes. Standard automatic mode allows all outgoing traffic and blocks suspicious incoming traffic.
When switching to interactive mode, ESET behaves like a traditional firewall, i.e. Every time an unknown program attempts to access the network, the product displays a user request for further action. Nevertheless. The control function has several advanced options. The firewall can apply your choice once, create a permanent rule based on it, or remember the choice until the program exits. By default, the selection is not remembered, i.e. the user will have to respond to requests every time.
After clicking on the detailed information link, the user is shown information about the publisher, file reputation and remote computer and ports. When you select advanced settings, you can edit firewall rules using individual IP addresses and port numbers. Regular users will not find these features useful.
Many products, notably Norton and Kaspersky, make software control decisions themselves and do not rely on inexperienced users. ZoneAlarm Extreme Security 2017 uses a massive database of known trusted files to process applications and automatically configures software controls. In interactive mode, ESET Firewall needs to manually define rules for all programs and even Windows components - not the best approach.
One way to avoid the endless stream of requests is to use learning mode. In this mode, ESET monitors all programs that access the network and creates rules for allowing access. The training mode will automatically end after two weeks, although this period can be changed. After this, there will be noticeably fewer requests. You might also consider choosing a policy-based mode, which blocks all connections except those allowed by the firewall rules.
Network protection in ESET NOD32 Internet Security is enhanced compared to the capabilities of a standalone antivirus. However, in the exploit test, both products performed identically.
At least ESET's firewall successfully resisted direct targeted attacks. The comprehensive antivirus has two visible processes and one service, but during testing it was not possible to find a way to disable them using malicious techniques.
The ESET firewall was a real disappointment. It was unable to protect against leakage of the real IP address, and software control does not fully cope with its task. In interactive mode, the program floods the user with requests. This is a traditional firewall based on outdated technologies. Many modern products offer more advanced solutions.
Home network protection
When you select the “Home network protection” panel, an image of a network map appears in the main antivirus window. Detected devices are displayed as icons in concentric circles. In this case, the router and local device are shown in the very center. The next circle shows recently connected devices, and the furthest circle shows devices connected in the last month.
If ESET cannot obtain the name, it displays the IP address. The Network Wizard lets you figure out what's behind the IP address and helps you add a clear name. From the detailed view, you can select the troubleshooting link to view traffic blocked by the firewall from this device.
Click the “Scan router” button to have ESET check your router’s security settings. Several penetration tests will be run, targeting the router. If problems are detected, ESET will immediately offer to fix them.
Bank payment protection
ESET is focusing on this feature because one of the three panels on the main screen is dedicated to banking security. Selecting the panel opens the default secure version of your browser with a green border and a “Protected by ESET” banner in the top panel. The browser opens to a page that explains the purpose of this feature and recommends using it only for online banking and financial transactions, and not for regular surfing. After installing the antivirus, you need to restart your computer for the bank payment protection to work. The function supports work with Chrome, Firefox and Internet Explorer. Users of Opera, Vivaldi and other browsers will not be able to use it.
Just like the Safe Money feature in Kaspersky Lab products, bank payment protection is automatically activated when you visit a well-known financial site in a regular, unsecured browser. ESET will prompt you to launch Secure Browser and ask if you want to remember this choice permanently.
Limited Parental Controls
Access to ESET's parental controls is hidden deep in the settings. In the left navigation menu, you need to select “Settings”, and then you need to go to the “Security Tools” section. Once enabled, you will see a list of Windows accounts. To complete the configuration, you need to specify which accounts belong to adults and which to children.
Depending on the child's age, ESET determines which of three dozen content categories will be blocked. Upon closer examination of the rules, you can see that each category has age restrictions - for everyone, 12+, 18+ or prohibited. Please note that even adult accounts will be blocked from the Crime and Malware categories. There are only three categories in the scope at a time, so setting up the system causes serious difficulties.
In testing, the content filter worked reliably. The filter works in any browser and is not disabled by simple network commands, which have been successful with some competitors. During the test, it was not possible to detect sites that escaped blocking. When blocked, ESET displays a simple warning in the browser, similar alerts are displayed when a phishing threat or malicious site is detected. A child will not be able to request to view a blocked site, as can be done in Symantec Norton Family Premier.
ESET handles HTTPS protected sites differently. It can't replace the blocked resource with an information page, so an error message appears in the browser and a pop-up notification explains what happened.
In the main ESET app, parents can view a list of blocked sites by date and time of attempt, account and content category.
This is where the parental control options end. Here you will not find the function of managing contacts in instant messengers, social network analytics or monitoring video games by their rating. In addition, you cannot manage your Internet and computer usage time. Parental controls are very limited, but work well.
Accurate antispam
ESET Standalone Antivirus has effective built-in email protection. The component scans incoming POP3 and IMAP mail and outgoing SMTP mail for malware. ESET supports integration with Outlook, Outlook Express/Windows Mail or Windows Live Mail for enhanced control. When malware is detected, the tool removes the dangerous attachment and adds its name to the subject of the message. The comprehensive antivirus also has a full-fledged spam filter.
To enable antispam, go to Settings > Internet protection and select the gear icon next to the “Antispam” section. There aren't many settings. The user can enable advanced antispam protection, which should improve accuracy. This feature is disabled by default because it seriously reduces mail processing speed. You can change the default label and enable spam scoring.
By default, antispam imports the list of contacts and recipients of your messages into exceptions. Emails that have been manually identified as not spam are also placed there. Manual editing of the white and black list of recipients is available.
In modern conditions, not everyone needs a spam filter, because many email providers already have this function. If you still need a separate antispam, then ESET does a great job.
Webcam protection
Reports of webcam surveillance are emerging with alarming regularity. Of course, you can tape your camera, but if you do a lot of web conferencing, the constant taping and unsticking can get tiresome.
ESET's webcam protection is an addition to software control, but easier to use. The user can block any attempts to access the camera and disable protection only while using Skype. If you spend a little time setting it up, you can control which programs can access the camera and enable an alert to display before granting access. It was not possible to test the function in action, but for webcam users it can be really useful.
Minor performance impact
ESET showed a moderate impact on system resources. In a test measuring system boot times, the antivirus slowed boot times by just 11 percent, which is better than average.
A test script that copies a large collection of large files between drives with ESET active took 20 percent longer to complete. Another script that checks the work with archives was executed equally both with and without active protection.
ESET NOD32 Internet Security is a new product and it is not fair to compare it with last year's versions of other ESET products. However, the previous version of ESET NOD32 Smart Security seriously slowed down system performance - 39 percent in three tests versus 11 percent for ESET NOD32 Internet Security.
Components of different quality
Although antivirus protection is undoubtedly the best part of this solution, there are some components that also deserve attention. Webcam protection is an unusually useful feature, bank payment protection reliably protects online transactions, and a router scanner helps identify problems on your home network. On the other hand, the firewall failed basic tests, the parental control system was severely curtailed, and phishing protection was ineffective.
The title of “Editor's Choice” in the comprehensive antivirus category still remains with Bitdefender Internet Security and Kaspersky Internet Security.
ESET NOD32 Internet Security 10 review:
Advantages:
- very good results in laboratory tests and in our own tests;
- HIPS blocked many exploits;
- high scanning speed;
- useful network map;
- secure browser for online banking;
- simple spam filter for POP3 and IMAP processing.
Flaws
- The firewall did not pass standard tests;
- mediocre protection against phishing;
- limited parental control.
Overall rating
Antivirus protection is the best feature of ESET NOD32 Internet Security 10. Other additions include an outdated firewall that failed standard tests, and a parental control system that can only filter content.
Every day, users wonder about security on their computer. In this article, we will figure out which antivirus to choose, what to start with, and what to pay attention to first.
So, which antivirus should you choose? First of all, you need to decide for yourself whether you are ready to pay for your safety? Only after this can you start choosing an antivirus. Since I don't know about your choice, I'll look at both options.
Let's start with paid Antiviruses
Kaspersky (Kaspersky)- perhaps one of the most reliable antiviruses, has a huge number of fans, protects against all types of infection and has a lot of settings, which is not unimportant, be careful - an incorrectly configured Kaspersky antivirus can cause you a lot of inconvenience, and there will be no more benefit than free. If you are willing to pay for the safety of your PC, then you can undoubtedly purchase this antivirus on the official website, but I want to warn you that this antivirus is very “gluttonous”, it will be an excellent protector of your computer, but at the same time it will “eat up” a lot of power your PC. If you have an old computer or its power leaves much to be desired, then this antivirus is not for you, otherwise it will simply become a headache for you.
Dr.web (doctor web)– an excellent program for use both on a home PC and for office use. Doctor Web antivirus has proven itself to be an excellent computer healer; it very quickly recognizes malware, spyware, Trojans, worms, spam advertisements and much more. A huge advantage of this antivirus is its resource intensity; the operation of the Dr.web program is almost unnoticeable, which makes it easy to use even on a very weak computer. Although many say that its resource intensity greatly affects its performance.
ESET NOD32 (nod 32)– a good antivirus for home use. A significant advantage of node 32 was its easy interface. Like Doctor Web, it does not consume many computer resources. But I often hear from many people that NOD32 does not scan the computer thoroughly enough, as if not so deeply and misses some directories that are located somewhere far away in your PC system. From this we can conclude that after such a check, worms and Trojans may remain that have penetrated deeper into the system.
Avast– in my opinion, Avast antivirus is the golden mean, this is the antivirus I use now. The reason for choosing this antivirus was habit, about 7 years ago I went to the Internet to download some free antivirus, then panda antivirus was advertised all around, but for some reason I downloaded avast and use it successfully, in fact it failed me several times , but only due to my negligence - I did not update it for a long time. The Avasta scanner scans threats of different categories quite well and does not consume many resources of your computer. The downside of this program has always been one thing: it practically did not help if it was installed on an already infected PC; in essence, this meant that Avast did a poor job of treating infected objects. I would like to tell you that the other day I was reinstalling windows for a friend and forgot to install the antivirus, within a day he runs back and says, Vanek, a lot of advertising crashes in my browser every time I open a new tab. I naturally responded to this - handsome, you found it quickly……… I was already thinking about changing Windows again, but I decided to try installing Avast first and my surprise knew no bounds when within 15 minutes the infected files were found and sent to quarantine.
So, the first conclusion is which antivirus to choose? If you are willing to pay and your computer is powerful enough, we buy Kaspersky antivirus. If the computer is weak or old, then we without a doubt download the Doctor Web or Nod32 antivirus.
If you need good protection and you are not willing to pay a lot and risk your safety, we download Avast antivirus.
I would like to draw your attention, no matter what antivirus you choose, you MUST update it daily, now they are updated automatically every day by default, you periodically need permission and that’s it, so when a sign appears in the lower right corner asking you to update the antivirus, we do not click on the cross with in words: ahhhh later, now there’s no time, but click allow update or install update. Modern providers provide fairly fast reception and transmission of data over the Internet, so it will take a few minutes, no more. Don’t try your luck by risking the safety of your computer; there will always be a smart guy who was just waiting for this risk from you.
Now let's look at free antiviruses
AVG (Aug) is one of the very common antiviruses that can be used for free. Based on the results of use, we can say that this antivirus works well and quickly finds most known vulnerabilities. But it wouldn't be a bad thing, the program makes too many requests and thereby causes a load, so many of the weakest computers simply start to freeze. You have to reboot to work normally again, so I would choose such an application only if the PC power allows it.
Avira (avira)– when I installed this antivirus, I was slightly at a loss, it looked for infected files perfectly, it worked like a “rapid fire”. But I was upset by the stories of many people that this antivirus very stupidly intercepts files on the fly and indeed it recognizes threats for the most part after infection. That is, he first allows my PC to be infected, and then finds this threat and eliminates it, I don’t know about you, but I was outraged.
Agree, it is not very good to first allow a problem to arise and only then begin to solve it. In fact, if someone wanted to get passwords from my PC, and they succeeded, and then they turned it off. The fact is that I will lose the data anyway. Therefore, this option will not triple me.
Avast– it’s a bit of a misconception, it seems like you’ve just read about it in paid antiviruses, but the Avasta developers have come up with a cool feature: you download the demo version of the program and then literally go through an easy registration in just a couple of clicks. We go into the settings and see that the period of official use has changed from 30 days to 365 days, that is, we received an antivirus for free for a year, I don’t know about you, but I really liked it. Read more about this antivirus, its advantages,
the correct setup and the official free version are described.
The second conclusion is that if there is no paid antivirus on your PC, then I recommend installing Avast and not bothering. Many people call it a “blind kitten” - bullshit, often paid Kaspersky cannot solve the problem with the virus, just don’t forget to update. I told you my opinion, now the choice is yours. There is no perfect protection
but you can always choose the best of what is available. The most reliable protection has always been and will remain unchanged - this is your knowledge.
I hope you have understood your choice a little and were still able to choose something for yourself; in the future we will consider each antivirus in detail. If you like the article, I look forward to your comments, thoughts and additions.
Here is a small test and comparison of four flagships in antivirus protection - ESET Smart Security 4.2.71.3, Dr.Web Security Space 6.00.1, Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 11.0.2.556, Norton Internet Security 2011 18.5.0.125.
For testing, 4 identical copies of the Windows XP SP3 operating system with all updates at the time of publication of the article were selected. This made it possible to make the most accurate comparison of antivirus products. Let's look at some interesting results.
Starting the system. The following test was carried out: first, the startup time of the operating system without an antivirus installed was recorded, and then a comparison was made with the startup speed of the system with each antivirus product separately.
Launch the browser. The test was done using a similar procedure. The browser is Opera 11.00.1156 International Final. The result records the time the program was opened (do not confuse the time of opening the program with a fully loaded web page!).
Unpacking the archive. The test shows how long it takes a system with antivirus installed to unpack the archive. To carry out the test, WinRAR 4.00 Beta 4 was used, with which 1 file of 510 MB was packed.
Checking the system disk. Each antivirus scanned the system disk, the files of which occupied approximately 4.5 GB. The maximum settings of antivirus products were used.
As you can see, in terms of performance, ESET won in three out of four tests. Norton won in system scanning speed.
Let's consider another interesting point - the load on the PC. Let's compare how much memory each antivirus product consumes during idle time (when nothing happens on the PC) and during scanning of the above-mentioned system drive.
And here again he takes the lead ESET– it used approximately 60-65 MB of memory during idle time and during scanning.
Someone who disappointed is this Dr.Web. During idle time it used 105-110 MB (!), and that's just the core itself!
To scan the system drive, Dr.Web uses a separate module – Dr.Web Scanner. A separate module used an additional 100 MB of memory. Together with the core, you get more than 200 MB of memory - too much, you agree.
Kaspersky Internet Security 2011, which many consider a “monster” for weak PCs, showed twofold results. In idle mode, it took up almost the same amount as ESET - 60-65 MB.
But during scanning, Kaspersky is truly a “monster” - 150-170 MB of memory
Norton Internet Security 2011 showed good results. During idle time it stayed at 60-65 MB.
And during scanning – 80-85 MB, which personally pleasantly surprised me.
In total, ESET Smart Security confidently climbed to first place, and Norton Internet Security was located very close to it. Of course, Dr.Web disappointed... With a fairly high level of protection, the product uses a lot of PC resources, and the scanning time of the system disk took 3 times longer than the third best result. Kaspersky Internet Security 2011, despite its high scanning speed (which is nice), used an indecent amount of memory during scanning of the system disk compared to other products.
In the end, I would like to note that these results do not in any way confirm or refute the quality of protection against malicious objects and other threats!
