Which AV software should I use?

I am having trouble choosing a good AV software to use. I have the option of using:

1. aVast! Home Edition - I am currently using this and have for years. Should I stay with it? I like its boot-time scanner.
2. Nod32
3. Avira Free Personal
4. BitDefender
5. Kaspersky
6. Microsoft Security Essentials

I'm hearing that Avira, free edition, has the best detection rates. Am I correct?

Also do any of these programs delete the "infected file"? A long time ago when I tried AVG, it deleted a false positive file even though I pressed ignore/quarantine.

Are there any other good ones that I should check out? Which one wouldn't take up a lot of resources?

 

Yes Avira has the best detection rates among the free AV's.
I'd say if your happy with avast!, then just stick with it, unless you want to give something like Avira a try. They'r both pretty much on the low side of resource consumption.
Microsoft Security Essentials, although doing very good now, is still in beta. So i wouldnt recommend it now. But when's its out its definitely a good option to look at.
Now, among the paid ones (Kaspersky, Bitdefender, NOD32), dont even think abt BitDefender. Very high resource usage. But its just my personal opinion.
NOD32 and Kaspersky are very good suites, and u should look into them, if ur willing to pay.

If you wanna know anything else, let us know.
Cheers!

 

If you have the budget, go ahead and take paid version AVs.
Your choice would be Kaspersky or ESET NOD32 currently(BEST I think). Actually, many paid version AVs are all good as well.
I heard Norton 2010 is performing great too but it is on BETA only.

If I am you, I would use the Free AVs 1st, AVIRA, AVAST! or AVG in the meantime. AVIRA and AVAST! are the BEST, AVG slightly weaker than them.
After that, wait for new AVs, because many AV companies is planning their 2010 AV. Grab the new 1 is better to grab the old 1. LOL.

 

If you're comparing based on the light footprint the AV software has on your computer, here is a direct comparison of a few:
1. Kaspersky (50MB installation)
2. ESET Nod32 (34MB installation)
3. Norton Antivirus 2009 (~150MB)

Personally, I've been using Norton Internet Security (it's better than Norton Anti-virus) for the past 5 years. I was dissapointed with previous versions, but since NIS 2009 came out, it's been a significant improvement, and with NIS 2010 reaching shelves soon (after beta testng), I would consider it a worthy competitor.

Regarding your question, for NIS 2009, the software doesn't delete the infected file (or false positives) automatically. It gives you a few choices (monitor, quarantine) before the option to delete it.

However, the best detection rates and the lightest resource user among all is ESET Nod32. After my subscription for NIS 2009 is done, I'm considering either shifting to Nod32 or staying with Symantec for NIS 2010. However, one disadvantage for Nod32 is that it doesn't include Firewall Protection.

Check this link for Competitive Advantages of Nod32 for proof of their claimed best detection rates. Note on that link that Symantec/Norton does not trail behind too far and is the next best bet.

Lastly, if you want an overall side-by-side comparison of all the features, prices, support, etc. of all the major antivirus programs, check this reliable link to Top Ten Reviews. This compares all of the top 2009 antivirus programs. Take note too that some AV softwares offer P2P Protection for downloaded torrent files (which Nod 32 and Norton don't have).

Anyways, good luck on your search. Hope all the info helps!

 

AVG is in the LIST! LOL!
I don't like AVG honestly. If it is AVG free edition, I might think about it(I would use it if AVIRA and AVAST are dead). AVG paid edition would be lame totally. I rather buy Kaspersky since they are the same price. Moreover, Kaspersky is far superior than AVG.

 

Avira is good, I have a few hundred machines running NOD and have yet to try the new NAV/NIS 2009 as Symantec totally turned me off their products around 2007 with their bloated and resource hungry programs ... I promise to try it sometime

 

NIS 2007 is purely a resource hungry devil.
My computer runs slower with it.
NIS 2009 is totally different from its previous generation. It does improve a lot. No doubt it is GREAT!
NIS 2010 beta is out there. Rumour said it is BETTER than NIS 2009.

 

My vote is for Avira. I tried Avast but I just couldn't get used to its interface, and it seemed to increase the startup time on my computers.

 

NOD32 FTW!!! Least system resources, highest detection rate! you can't go wrong with it!

and there are 32 bit version and 64 bit version so by purchasing one license, you can install either of them on your system

 

Avira AV 9..it's that simple..!~

*nice, simple and even better...free!


Cin

 

Yeah I might aim for NOD32. I didn't know they had a 64-bit version! I tried the trial before and I thought it didn't work because it was so silent! I don't like AVG. I'm not sure about NIS 09 but I've had the NIS 05 one and it failed badly. Why I am for NOD32 you say? It leaves a small footprint and because I'm a laptop gamer it might help a little. Avast is the best free AV I've ever used and Avira works decent but I don't like it.

 

I like AVG for overall protection, just make sure to disable the link scanner on installation.

Avira is okay but i had problems getting rid of simple USB flash drive worms

 

you are right about NOD32, very light and secure. Its 64 bit version is just as great

 

Yeah and I guess the 64-bit edition makes use of the processor and memory better and also scans faster.

Before I will buy anything I downloaded the NOD32 Smart Security trial again on Windows 7. NOD32 still works. I scanned and it found two trojans on my backup drive. The Action Center in Windows 7 reports that Windows Firewall and Windows Defender are running at the same time as ESET's. Is it normal?

 

Yep, it's normal. Apart from ESET ESS 4 (which I like a lot), there are some really good free ones. Avira, as already mentioned, is excellent and so is MSFT Security Essentials. I'm running all three, on different systems of course, and I really can't pick one over the other. I'd say MSE has the edge as it's free and, even in beta, it's super stable and extremely light on system resources. Plus, it integrates the best into 7.

 

Say, if ESET ESS 4 was free. Would you choose MSE, even though it's beta, or ESET ESS 4? I'm having trouble choosing. I never tried MSE yet since it's in beta but from you and others they say it's stable, fast and works great with Windows 7.

 

Well ESS is a more complete anti-malware solution, like NIS2009 (i.e. built-in firewall etc...) whereas MSE is just an AV/AS so in that sense I'd recommend ESS.

But I have to say MSE has been surprisingly good, updates frequently, integrates very well with the OS (not surprising as it's made by MSFT) and really just runs way in the background using very little overhead. Despite its UI being simplistic, it still has many advanced options and features but they just don't overwhelm the user like some others do.

And even with it being in beta it's already getting some positive reviews on detection capability. I read quite a few reviews and some mentioned that MSE picked up stuff that NOD32 (which ESS is based on) failed to detect. Link. And OneCare, which MSE is replacing, was the AV to beat when it came to False Positives; it had the least.

 

Avast works fine. Just stick with that.

 

^+1.

No, you don't.

Yes, but Avast free has password protection, a pre-boot scan, lots of configuration options and GMER antirootkit technology and only a slightly lower detection rate. And a cool spinning icon.
I'd say, you've got what you need.
If you're just curious about something new, check out Avira free and Microsoft Security Essentials (when it's out of beta).
Cheers.

 

tried the big free three for extensive periods but the latest versions of two caused freeze problems. The winner, Avast. Seems best for older XP type computers.

 

I have just epically failed myself. I was just looking for a lighter and better AV for my laptop because I play games on there. The AV seems to be using a lot of memory and Avast didn't find two real trojans on my backup drive, it still works good though. I'll try MSE first before I choose or stay with Avast.

 

If you simply want the highest detection rate and the lowest resource usage, use Avira free.

 

True, after my NOD32 license expires (in 2 years) I am gonna install Avira as I have had very good experiences with it.

I wonder how does a company like Avira afford to offer a free AV solution while keeping its updates constant and support and having such a great AV

 

I discovered that Avast is 64-bit too. I also am trying MSE right now and I'm amazed on how low-footprint it is. It's currently running at 2,468 K memory. I will just use a free program instead of buying one. I'm thinking about staying with MSE but I may choose Avast or Avira. I haven't tested MSE enough yet.

 

Don't forget MSE has two processes associated with it. You're probably looking at only one. But yeah, it's still very low on memory usage compared to many others. I like it more and more everyday too.

 

Another vote for avira, so far I have it installed in all my family laptop's and no viruses, especially on my dad's laptop he doesn't care he just gets into pages full of malware and viruses and avira has done a great job cleaning all the mess.

 

But MSE never updates automatically. It still relies on Windows Update for it malware definition updates. Windows Update classifies MSE's definition update as a recommended update (which most of us won't install) instead of important update.
MSE also has high resource usage when compared to Avira free, Norton Antivirus 2009.

 

How about NOD32 or Avast Free?