New Update Bitdefender - BDTS updates

[presntes]

• An update has been released for Bitdefender Home solutions on October 16, 2023 - version 27.0.20.110 with the following notable changes:
  • Removed the Wallet feature
  • Fixed an issue where Safepay would open minimized
  • Fixed dropdown menus not functioning correctly on specific websites within Safepay
  • Fixed a rare issue where the Safepay interface would disappear or display page elements incorrectly
  • Fixed the right-click functionality that was not working on various websites while using Safepay

Product updates and release notes

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

• An update has been released for Bitdefender Home solutions on October 16, 2023 - version 27.0.20.110 with the following notable changes:
  • Removed the Wallet feature
  • Fixed an issue where Safepay would open minimized
  • Fixed dropdown menus not functioning correctly on specific websites within Safepay
  • Fixed a rare issue where the Safepay interface would disappear or display page elements incorrectly
  • Fixed the right-click functionality that was not working on various websites while using Safepay

Product updates and release notes

I would like them to lower the processes in RAM a little, they seem excessive to me, that's why I uninstalled it :/

 

[Jonny Quest]

Bye Wallet, you are officially no more. Thank you for serving us so well for 10 years. RIP

 

[Jonny Quest]

I would like them to lower the processes in RAM a little, they seem excessive to me, that's why I uninstalled it :/

Same here. I did let the Admins and other Mods know in a PM why I uninstalled it a couple of weeks ago. Too many running processes, and too much RAM being used..even sporadically. In my case, 250-750 MB on Windows 11.

 

[SeriousHoax]

I would like them to lower the processes in RAM a little, they seem excessive to me, that's why I uninstalled it :/

That's not gonna happen. It seems in version 27 they have made it so that each function now use a different process. A far more modular approach than before. Quite similar to some other products like: Avast, Avira, F-Secure, McAfee, Sophos, Trend Micro, etc.
If you disable bonus features that you don't need, Bitdefender's number of running processes will decrease. When I tested, I think I was able to reduce the number of processes down to 8. By default, it's more than that. I didn't notice any ram usage difference on my 16 GB ram system. About 400 MB in the beginning. Then it reduces down to 300-380 on average. But when I ran ram heavy games, it came down to as low as only 80 MB. So don't think ram usage is a big deal when you have 8/16 GB ram. It can release used ram to other processes when needed.

 

[Pat MacKnife]

Also uninstalled it a couple of weeks ago, my problem was web browsing sometimes very slow ... several websites loading 10 a 15 seconds, also with the Trafficlight extension ( i no longer use it) replaced it with Avira browser safety extension.

 

[Jonny Quest]

That's not gonna happen. It seems in version 27 they have made it so that each function now use a different process. A far more modular approach than before. Quite similar to some other products like: Avast, Avira, F-Secure, McAfee, Sophos, Trend Micro, etc.
If you disable bonus features that you don't need, Bitdefender's number of running processes will decrease. When I tested, I think I was able to reduce the number of processes down to 8. By default, it's more than that. I didn't notice any ram usage difference on my 16 GB ram system. About 400 MB in the beginning. Then it reduces down to 300-380 on average. But when I ran ram heavy games, it came down to as low as only 80 MB. So don't think ram usage is a big deal when you have 8/16 GB ram. It can release used ram to other processes when needed.

And so now we, the users, have to disable "bonus features" manually, from 16 to 8 to lower those processes and RAM? Why not just use the free version with less features, which also has issues with RAM? That's not gonna happen People are buying Total Security for (most of) those features, now we're going to disable them? I don't have to do that with F-Secure. It's not so much what amount of RAM I have to spare, but seeing the amount of processes and RAM from the start (install) is a bit too much for me. But, to each their own

 

[SeriousHoax]

And so now we, the users, have to disable "bonus features" manually, from 16 to 8 to lower those processes and RAM? Why not just use the free version with less features, which also has issues with RAM? That's not gonna happen People are buying Total Security for (most of) those features, now we're going to disable them? I don't have to do that with F-Secure. It's not so much what amount of RAM I have to spare, but seeing the amount of processes and RAM from the start (install) is a bit too much for me. But, to each their own

View attachment 279166

I don't fancy seeing a lot of processes either. I just explained how BD behaves now which might be informative and helpful to other BD users.
From your screenshots, I see that F-Secure has 8 processes running excluding its VPN service. That's how it is with many AV products nowadays. Many of them use many processes. McAfee and Sophos probably have the most.
But to find an AV that use only one or two processes, we don't have to go too far. The built-in Microsoft Defender is up and running using only 1 process.
But things like this could only be an annoyance for geeky users like us on the forum. Average users don't open task manager

 

[Jonny Quest]

I don't fancy seeing a lot of processes either. I just explained how BD behaves now which might be informative and helpful to other BD users.
From your screenshots, I see that F-Secure has 8 processes running excluding its VPN service. That's how it is with many AV products nowadays. Many of them use many processes. McAfee and Sophos probably have the most.
But to find an AV that use only one or two processes, we don't have to go too far. The built-in Microsoft Defender is up and running using only 1 process.
But things like this could only be an annoyance for geeky users like us on the forum. Average users don't open task manager

lol...how were you able to read my PM post, part of it, on BD forum regarding the processes and Ram??!!

For the average Bitdefender consumer like Ward and June Cleaver sitting at their kitchen table who don't know where to look or what they're looking at, it isn't an issue, they don't even know. Most of the time the problem comes from us geeks, who monitor these things and also have prior experience with other AV's and monitoring those, being curious and all.

So maybe that's what it comes down to, the average Ward and June Cleaver users are fine (60% of BD users?) it's just us nosey and curious geeks who are the problem, who tend to point these things out and question it.

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

That's not gonna happen. It seems in version 27 they have made it so that each function now use a different process. A far more modular approach than before. Quite similar to some other products like: Avast, Avira, F-Secure, McAfee, Sophos, Trend Micro, etc.
If you disable bonus features that you don't need, Bitdefender's number of running processes will decrease. When I tested, I think I was able to reduce the number of processes down to 8. By default, it's more than that. I didn't notice any ram usage difference on my 16 GB ram system. About 400 MB in the beginning. Then it reduces down to 300-380 on average. But when I ran ram heavy games, it came down to as low as only 80 MB. So don't think ram usage is a big deal when you have 8/16 GB ram. It can release used ram to other processes when needed.

What you say doesn't make sense, it's absurd. I want an antivirus, this looks like malware. Consuming 400 MB is excessive. Avast also has a lot of processes in ram, approximately 11, but it consumes less than 200 MB.
Greetings.

 

[SumTingWong]

That's not gonna happen. It seems in version 27 they have made it so that each function now use a different process. A far more modular approach than before. Quite similar to some other products like: Avast, Avira, F-Secure, McAfee, Sophos, Trend Micro, etc.
If you disable bonus features that you don't need, Bitdefender's number of running processes will decrease. When I tested, I think I was able to reduce the number of processes down to 8. By default, it's more than that. I didn't notice any ram usage difference on my 16 GB ram system. About 400 MB in the beginning. Then it reduces down to 300-380 on average. But when I ran ram heavy games, it came down to as low as only 80 MB. So don't think ram usage is a big deal when you have 8/16 GB ram. It can release used ram to other processes when needed.

what features did you disable?

 

[HarborFront]

Updated

An update has been released for Bitdefender Home solutions on October 23, 2023 - version 27.0.23.112 with the following notable changes:

• ✔ Fixed Safepay disconnects the VPN when closed
• ✔ Fixed an issue where files were not downloaded in the Safepay folder
• ✔ Other backend fixes and improvements

Product updates and release notes - Page 2

🔄 An update has been released for Bitdefender VPN Standalone for Android - version 1.2.9.104 with the following notable changes:

community.bitdefender.com

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

It is curious that users are OK with a browser consuming 1 or 2 GB of RAM along with 20+ child processes, but they have a problem with Bitdefender's 17 processes consuming 600 MB RAM.

On a 16 GB system, using a browser, multiple apps that load at system start, the system routinely runs in the 50 to 60 % RAM usage range. There's more than sufficient excess RAM capacity.

The modular, multi-process is deliberately designed for a host of reasons.

It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to complain about the RAM usage and multiple processes.

In general such complaints have always been misguided. The complaints about RAM usage and multiple processes is not limited to just security software.

There is no excuse to continue putting processes in ram in an antivirus. Nothing that multiprocesses and things. Neither Avast, nor Norton, nor many antiviruses have so many processes in ram. Besides, Bitdefender is slow, because it takes hours to analyze. To have so many processes in ram, the av should be fast, and it is not.
Greetings.
pd: Google Chrome consumes a lot, yes, it has many processes in ram, but the browser is very fast. If Bitdefender is going to put in so much process, at least improve the speed.

 

[Trident]

Increasing the number of processes will not necessarily make things faster.

Increasing the number of concurrent processes in programming is usually done with the sole intention to prevent crash and disfunction of critical tasks, in the event of an error. Otherwise said, it is for stability purposes. It also prevents currently performed tasks from slowing down others which may be urgent.
Some vendors may have put more attention in handling exceptions and multi-core optimisation.

Consuming more random access memory may or may not optimise performance, it depends on programmers. If Bitdefender has decided to keep definitions and other code loaded in memory, they’ve deemed this will decrease disk reads and will speed everything up.

In any case, there is no right or wrong approach as programming, albeit governed by some guidelines, is not strictly set in stone. Bitdefender’s multitude of processes and high memory consumption is just one way of doing things.

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

With Bitdefender there is only a single process responsible for the scanning. It is expected to use from 500 to 600 MB RAM. During a system scan it can increase to 650 to 750 MB. Once the scan is completed, memory will be released and it will return back to about 550 MB after some time.

Loading and keeping more things in active memory makes it faster to retrieve them.

The whole purpose of RAM is to use as much of it as possible without reaching 100% and invoking writes to the page file. If RAM is underutilized then that excess unused capacity is a wasted resource.


Some use tricks to hide their actual memory use.


It is unfortunate that Bitdefender is slow for you. In my experience, Bitdefender full system scans complete within 3 or 4 minutes. Disinfection completes in about 30 seconds to 1 minute. This is on system with SSD.

I do not doubt the reasons that you think or feel Bitdefender is slow, but my testing and experience has never shown Bitdefender to be slow. At least not scanning or disinfection.


Increasing the number of processes will not necessarily make things faster.

For you or Bitdefender it will not be a problem, for some it is, not all of us have 32 GB of vram, so as not to worry about the ram. Bitdefender is slow and buggy, there are no excuses. I don't want an antivirus that fills my task manager with processes, that's why I uninstalled it. As well as the updates, which are also very very slow.

 

[mlnevese]

Bitdefender updates have been in need of severe optimization for years. You probably won't notice how long it takes in day to day use as it's all done in background. But if you want to check something you just downloaded with the latest signatures the amount of time it takes to update is quite noticiable.

Other products take seconds to update. Bitdefender may take some minutes. The first update after install will probably give you enough time to prepare a coffee or some tea.

 

[Mindaugas]

Bitdefender’s most recent version number is 27.0.25.115 and was released on November 13, 2023.

Product Update Changelog:

General fixes and improvements.

Latest Bitdefender Build Version & Manual Update Guide

Got this update today

 

[Jonny Quest]

Latest Bitdefender Build Version & Manual Update Guide

Got this update today

Which is hopefully going to address the high memory use some members were having, including myself.

Bitdefender RAM Usage Gradually Increases

Apparently this issue has been around for quite some time.

community.bitdefender.com

 

[blackice]

Does Bitdefender still have massive definition updates these days (~800MB)? Also, does it still have problems activating Game Mode without adding individual exes?

 

[SeriousHoax]

Does Bitdefender still have massive definition updates these days (~800MB)? Also, does it still have problems activating Game Mode without adding individual exes?

1. Yes. Still from 400-800 MB of disk writes when it updates.
2. Game mode can detect steam games without any issue, I think. They fix game detection issues if reported by users. For things like offline or let's say pirated games, it doesn't.