Im running AVG on my PC but i find that it uses way too many resources and it slows things down alot. How does it compare to Kaspersky? Is it better or worst as far as hogging system resources?
I actually prefer AVAST and have had good protection from it without impacting system performance. Between AVG & Kaspersky I think Kaspersky provides better in the wild protection than AVG. I had AVG let me down big time in the past. I come from the security industry and have seen the testing as well to validate these results.
I have kaspersky since several years and I can recommend it for normal use. BUT it slows down your system.
At the moment I have big problems with it, cause I have a new computer (i7- 860) and run scrapebox multible instances.
Fastposter max connections - 50
Backlinkchecker - 120
Blog Analyser - 40
So Kasperksy Internet Security has to check several websites at the same time.
For heavy use, I can't recommend it!
AVG works the best for me. It does not consume a lot of system load. It does not lag even many process running on background. But it depend on you computer/laptop power, I'm using window 7, i7 processor, 2GB geforce. I just change from Kaspersky to AVG.
Im running AVG on my PC but i find that it uses way too many resources and it slows things down alot. How does it compare to Kaspersky? Is it better or worst as far as hogging system resources?
The absolute best "low footprint" AV I've found has actually been eset Nod32 anti-virus (not internet security). I've had all of the above before and there's not really a fully featured comparison.
Kaspersky is the best between the two, but I quit using it about a year ago because of the footprint and getting infected a lot using SB (curse you Russian blogs! )
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.