Low Resource AV

[rikishi19]

OK guys, here's my dilemma.

I have an old XP laptop with only 512 RAM that I have not used in about a year since I bought and built a high-end PC.

My partner is now going to be using this old laptop for very basic functions, so there is no justification in getting an upgraded laptop just yet. The main issue I find which affects performance is the AV installed. It did have a version of AVG a couple of years ago, but it updated and then became a real resource hog so I switched to Avast and I was amazed at the speed increase.

I have the previous version of Avast installed on it (5), as this was the best I found with memory resources not being hogged up. Since there is a new version of Avast, will the one I have installed still get sufficient definition updates to keep the computer protected?

If not, which will be the least resource hungry out there?

I tried MSE at one point but this really had a noticeable difference on performance over Avast so I quickly switched back.

Basically, do I need to replace Avast to stay protected and if so, which is the best solution on resource use?

Cheers for any suggestions

[tushR]

Avira could be a very good choice.

[J_L]

The newest version of Avast is still light, and includes more protection (AutoSandbox, WebRep, and Site Blocking).

[Av_Crazy]

My vote for avast too

[Anupam]

Avast still works light, even with the latest version. And as J_L said, it has got more features. Still, if you decide to be with Avast 5 for a while, you can... and you will still get the updates.

[26Dolphins]

Hi,

Maybe I'm wrong with this, but I think that resource consumption by Avast also depends on how many shields you install & run. If I'm correct, determine which ones you'd really need and try version 6.

I actually find Avast 6 lighter than previous versions, despite the extra goodies.

Cheers

[rikishi19]

I'll go for an update to the latest Avast then.

Avira has annoying nags if I'm not mistaken?

Plus I'm very comfortable with Avast having used it in the past, although I have MSE on my main PC, will be good to see how the latest Avast goes and I may end up putting it on my main too, however I have no reason to replace MSE at the moment.

[syntax_error]

Here's a couple http://www.av-test.org/certifications.php

Which is a pity because MC reports MSE is well integrated with IE9 and Windows Firewall.

If I used IE9 I would be tempted, but otherwise I see better options.

[tushR]

Originally Posted by rikishi19

I'll go for an update to the latest Avast then.

Avira has annoying nags if I'm not mistaken?

Plus I'm very comfortable with Avast having used it in the past, although I have MSE on my main PC, will be good to see how the latest Avast goes and I may end up putting it on my main too, however I have no reason to replace MSE at the moment.

Yes, Avira has a nag screen...but it doesn't irritate me, as for me it is an indicator that its updated. I like it because its light and has a very good detection rate.

Avast has been at the top 2 for ages but I always found it to slow down my surfing (I have only 512 kbps net), hence cant afford Avast...well one can disable web shield or others but then you compromise on security and you never know if others shields depends on the one you disabled.

It boils down to personal choice, both are very good free Av.

[rikishi19]

Originally Posted by syntax_error

Here's a couple http://www.av-test.org/certifications.php

Which is a pity because MC reports MSE is well integrated with IE9 and Windows Firewall.

If I used IE9 I would be tempted, but otherwise I see better options.

I may be tempted to replace my MSE if I like the performance of Avast. Didn't realise MSE's detection was that bad. Taken a big slump recently it seems.