HOW TO SPEED UP A SLOW PC OR INFECTED PC. (a mini guide)

hubert_cumberdale

omg

closed

Avira and mse have many components - have a look at how many exe's are in the avira directory, avscan, avguard, sched, avgnt ,update, avcenter, avshadow, avnotify, various drivers etc. They kick in and out during the course of a session, simply looking at task manager doesn't tell the whole story.

If ping times are important to you, you can turn off the webshield while you game, in my tests Avast doesn't have a significant impact on browsing or ping speeds, (it's always going to have some impact as is any scanner scanning web traffic)

Jeff_Bridges_hair

Top thread and hope it gets stickied(if thats a word)

GetRealBabe

Hi

Thanks, OP-finally got rid of ctfmon :T:j:)

fiddiwebb

Agree with GunJack, Iv'e never noticed Avira peaking that high as well, would also be interested to know what the test conditions are to?

Avast may be more speedy but Avira has the edge on detection rates which unfortunately is not noted in your link.

Problems with Avast?........https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2994484

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2990540

Chocolat_Frog

Thanks for directing me to this thread. PC noticably better. What do I do with HijackThis log though?

closed

Post the hijackthis log, along with the other requested information in your original thread.

---

Avast vs Avira vs MSE vs AVG vs Any antivirus solution.

I've already explained why you don't see the same avira peak memory usage in task manager, more than one process is involved.

test conditions http://www.raymond.cc/antivirus/

This thread is about how to speed a pc up to something approaching the way it was when first purchased. It contains generic information which in most cases will produce the desired result in a short space of time without any additional input or expert knowledge, or reinstallation of windows (which always works!). It isn't intended as a discussion about virus scanner choice, which can be debated until the cows come home.

Any AV test you ever see will test a small subset of infections out there, the next test may produce a very different result, one day AV1 could be top, next test it could be no 27.

AV comparatives doesn't test the free version of avira, it's tests the paid for version - these are the detection rate results of the last 2 on demand tests from 2010 - Avast was the top free one in both, and beat many of the paid for AV's (none of the commonly used paid for AV's (mcafee/kaspersky/esetnod/norton) got above 99.4%).

Aug 2010

Free

avast 99.3%
avg 98.3
mse 97.6
avira antivir free untested

Paid for

gdata 99.9
avira antivir premium 99.8%
mcafee 99.4
bitdefender 99.3
panda 99.2
norton 98.7
eset/nod 98.6
kaspersky 98.3
sophos 96.8
trend 90.3

Feb 2010

avira antivir premium (paid for) 99.3%
avira antivir free untested
avast 97.3%
avg 94.2
mse 96.3

Avast has consistently high detection rates, scans emails which avira free doesn't, has no nag screens using ram up, has a nicer interface, fewer false positives.

Avast is lighter than any free or paid for AV currently. Along with malwarebytes on demand scanner, these are the best choice on old (or new) pc's imo, Avira would be my second choice. If people choose to use another virus scanner, the machine will run slower than it needs to be.

No antivirus solution will ever find 100% of infections, any AV choice is a balance of risk/performance/price.

GunJack

closed wrote: »

I've already explained why you don't see the same avira peak memory usage in task manager, more than one process is involved.

It isn't intended as a discussion about virus scanner choice, which can be debated until the cows come home.

sorry mate, just thought it was an interesting point and worth a comment without starting a whole new thread That peak figure is very high compared to "at rest" (30-ish k) but may re-try avast -web shield and see what happens to the pings

[Deleted User]

closed wrote: »

AV comparatives doesn't test the free version of avira, it's tests the paid for version

Completely irrelevant.

there is no need to test them separatly, because:
AVIRA free would score as the paid version, because our test-set does not contain spyware/adware etc.
Avast free scores exactly like the paid version.
Bitdefender too.
AVG free scores probably ~3% lower than AVG anti-malware.

Source

closed

That quote is 3 years old. The test set and the AV features are constantly evolving. Even if avira got 100% in their tests, that doesn't mean it is 100% effective, tests are based on a sample set, so 0.5% difference between avira and avast doesn't mean much, a different sample or another few months of AV updates could produce the opposite result.

This thread is going off topic, the recommendation of Avast over Avira (or anything else) is because it's lighter.