- Apr 24, 2013
- 1,200
- Content source
- https://youtu.be/qaC-CynM2tc
Bitdefender 2020 Beta Review by Anti-Virus4U.com Team
unused ram is wasted ram. The ram usage have nothing todo with a product being fast or slow on your computer. In fact, ram is the fastest component on your pc. If one antivirus consum much ram, that doenst mean its bad. Like Emsisoft, they use much ram, but they store for example the virus defs and other things there, because its simply faster. Its more like bitdefender is "bad" because it is buggy as hell on many machines, slows down your browsing and other things. But ram have nothing todo with it.Bitdefender always will be worst Antivirus because of so high usage on RAM, he is like a twin of AVG.
That's why for me Emsisoft is better choice than Bitdefender cuz Emsisoft is cheaper and less buggyunused ram is wasted ram. The ram usage have nothing todo with a product being fast or slow on your computer. In fact, ram is the fastest component on your pc. If one antivirus consum much ram, that doenst mean its bad. Like Emsisoft, they use much ram, but they store for example the virus defs and other things there, because its simply faster. Its more like bitdefender is "bad" because it is buggy as hell on many machines, slows down your browsing and other things. But ram have nothing todo with it.
unused ram is wasted ram. The ram usage have nothing todo with a product being fast or slow on your computer. In fact, ram is the fastest component on your pc. If one antivirus consum much ram, that doenst mean its bad. Like Emsisoft, they use much ram, but they store for example the virus defs and other things there, because its simply faster. Its more like bitdefender is "bad" because it is buggy as hell on many machines, slows down your browsing and other things. But ram have nothing todo with it.
I agree with you.One word : Bugdefender, its really the worst program ever. If you like bugs, buy it.
Its just strange that Bugdefender is always on top in charts ... as being the worst programOne word : Bugdefender, its really the worst program ever. If you like bugs, buy it.
I find it weird too, the signatures are good, the program is buggy.Its just strange that Bugdefender is always on top in charts ... as being the worst program
Been testing out BD TS regularly. Signatures are fine .ATC is alone extremely powerful even if rest of modules were disabled !I honestly see your comments guys as trash talking about BitDefender. How many of you have actually tried it reciently? (one year or less)
I've tested it on my host machine, for over two months. It didn't slow up my machine, at all. It had a little bug of incompatibility, but nothing serious, no BSODs, no slowdown or related. Scans were fast, definitions were amazing, FPs weren't many, boot time was okay (better than WD and Kaspersky). I just didn't like as much the GUI and the fact that tweaking isn't that advanced. But it worked. And it worked right. I'd definitely use it as my main AV when the time comes and my licenses expire.
As for malware protection, the behaviour blocker or similar I couldn't test as much since signatures were added amazingly fast. On my quick tests on VM most malware were covered up on default settings. I beg you Hub Testers to give a try to BTS latest stable version and share the results. Tweak it a bit.
It works now ! EDITED !!@Mahesh Sudula Those links are dead in ChromEdge.
Why ? is one of the best av in the marketOne word : Bugdefender, its really the worst program ever. If you like bugs, buy it.
In terms of protection BD is one of the best no doubt. But the program behaves differently in different computers and most of the computers I found have problems where it is installed. The program is buggy that's for sure. If it works on PC A without any problems, you'll have one hell of a protection. But if it doesn't, it'll cause you a lot of headaches. I agree about the RAM part. In today's world, an AV eating 250-500 MB RAM is not that bad unless it thrashes CPU and HDD. Previously when I tried BD a couple of years back it slowed down my browsing tremendously and the firewall was of no use since each and every program bypassed it. Now I've tried the 180 days trial of version 2019. The HTTPS scanning and the firewall problems have been solved. ATP is top notch, although it is prone to false positives since it quarantined syshardener while I was applying the tweaks. Bottom line is if BD works for you it's a superb suite but if it doesn't it'll be BugDefender for you.I honestly see your comments guys as trash talking about BitDefender. How many of you have actually tried it reciently? (one year or less)
I've tested it on my host machine, for over two months. It didn't slow up my machine, at all. It had a little bug of incompatibility, but nothing serious, no BSODs, no slowdown or related. Scans were fast, definitions were amazing, FPs weren't many, boot time was okay (better than WD and Kaspersky). I just didn't like as much the GUI and the fact that tweaking isn't that advanced. But it worked. And it worked right. I'd definitely use it as my main AV when the time comes and my licenses expire.
As for malware protection, the behaviour blocker or similar I couldn't test as much since signatures were added amazingly fast. On my quick tests on VM most malware were covered up on default settings. I beg you Hub Testers to give a try to BTS latest stable version and share the results. Tweak it a bit.
In terms of protection yes but in terms of stability no. Kaspersky is as effective as BD(if not more) and is much more bug-free.Why ? is one of the best av in the market