New Update Bitdefender Free Antivirus is back

[SeriousHoax]

If you want comparison, Kaspersky consumes 40MB with 0 CPU usage.

8GB of RAM is still a standard today, 16GB is only for gaming PCs.

BD uses more ram, but Kaspersky uses more CPU on average, which for me is worse. It's very noticeable while browsing. Happens due to HTTPS scanning.

 

[RoboMan]

I'm totally fine to block access to many modules... since it's the free version. But I really dislike the fact they won't allow you to access the settings of the main antivirus module. Like, I want to do basic changes like scan scripts or scan only new and modified files... or enable PUP detection. These doesn't feel like should be premium options.

 

[Trooper]

What's your system config?

I also have 32GB or RAM.

 

[blackice]

View attachment 265132

I also have 32GB or RAM.

Then why are you worried about memory? Are you editing audio/video?

 

[Trooper]

Then why are you worried about memory? Are you editing audio/video?

Not worried about it. I just do not like an AV using up so much RAM.

 

[Trooper]

with 32 gb ram you do not even have to look at physical ram usage
you do it, and bitdefender ram usage bothers you just because you are built that way, regardless of it being relevant or realistic
high ram usage makes an app faster; it does not slow down the system except for physical memory limited system

Except with BD, it is not making the app run faster. It's relevant to me and my workflow. But thanks anyway for your opinion.

 

[blackice]

Except with BD, it is not making the app run faster. It's relevant to me and my workflow. But thanks anyway for your opinion.

Well I think the idea is signatures in memory react more quickly than those reading off of a hard drive. Unused ram is wasted ram, but if it materially affects your workflow then maybe Bitdefender doesn’t work in your case. Nothing fits everybody.

 

[Moonhorse]

I have 8gb of ram bitdefender using around 450-600, i dont see whats the problem here? Atleast it does some caching so scanning only takes few minutes after first full scan

With firefox i had to disable DOH , as i would not get accessed to some pages, but TLS is fine

Google search does not show up the search results, bing does work though ...this is mentioned some time ago here aswell

 

[blackice]

I have 8gb of ram bitdefender using around 450-600, i dont see whats the problem here? Atleast it does some caching so scanning only takes few minutes after first full scan

With firefox i had to disable DOH , as i would not get accessed to some pages, but TLS is fine

Google search does not show up the search results, bing does work though ...this is mentioned some time ago here aswell

They still haven’t fixed the google search result conflict?

 

[Pat MacKnife]

Say hello to the new Antivirus Free for Windows!​

Say hello to the new Antivirus Free for Windows!

Even though Bitdefender Antivirus Free Edition has been withdrawn at the end of December 2021, the concept of providing a free solution and encourage people to protect themselves against the cyber threats out there never ceased to exist.

community.bitdefender.com

 

[topstuff]

RAM is highish, but seems ok for now, 200-500MB.
What is a dealbreaker for me is inability to customise the options to run it how I want to. One example is that everytime I open an app or even task manager, Bitdefender will call home. Happens not only after the 1st time, but every time it seems. Having those options to restrict that is what im after.

 

[Trooper]

Well I think the idea is signatures in memory react more quickly than those reading off of a hard drive. Unused ram is wasted ram, but if it materially affects your workflow then maybe Bitdefender doesn’t work in your case. Nothing fits everybody.

This is pretty much my line of thought as well. That said, it is just not for me. I mainly just wanted to check BD out. I much prefer ESET or Kaspersky for my usage.

 

[Captain Holly]

I removed BD from both laptops. Not that BD Free is bad, it has its good points and I am sure lots of people will use it but I do not like the "all or nothing" approach, even with the new GUI that has a few more settings. It just seems noisy to me. I am no expert at all but the comments from other MT members and on Wilders also steered me to remove BD. Browsing was a little faster with BD but the difference in speed is not enough for me to keep BD. I just think I am better off with WD and ConfigureDefender on High setting. I have a lifetime license for MBAM but have not used it in a couple of years. I already use the MBAM Browser Guard extension but I might read up on MBAM and give it another try. All AV's have their good and bad points. WD seems to have the least problems for me.

One other thing I would pass along here, if anyone needs to remove BD Free there is no dedicated BD remover for it. But the BD removal tool for the paid versions will also remove the free version. Even then it still leaves behind a lot of leftover files. I used HiBit to get rid of almost all of them, then searched with the Everything utility to locate the rest and deleted those manually.

C.H.

 

[Moonhorse]

I removed BD from both laptops. Not that BD Free is bad, it has its good points and I am sure lots of people will use it but I do not like the "all or nothing" approach, even with the new GUI that has a few more settings. It just seems noisy to me. I am no expert at all but the comments from other MT members and on Wilders also steered me to remove BD. Browsing was a little faster with BD but the difference in speed is not enough for me to keep BD. I just think I am better off with WD and ConfigureDefender on High setting. I have a lifetime license for MBAM but have not used it in a couple of years. I already use the MBAM Browser Guard extension but I might read up on MBAM and give it another try. All AV's have their good and bad points. WD seems to have the least problems for me.

One other thing I would pass along here, if anyone needs to remove BD Free there is no dedicated BD remover for it. But the BD removal tool for the paid versions will also remove the free version. Even then it still leaves behind a lot of leftover files. I used HiBit to get rid of almost all of them, then searched with the Everything utility to locate the rest and deleted those manually.

C.H.

I removed it aswell after trying it out for few days

Pros:
- install & forget
- web protection / phishing & malware filter is strongest i have seen
- protection wide its top notch by being better than previous free version of bitdefender
- privacy wide its probably not the privacy nightmare
- caching it does

Downsides:
- still after 2 years no http2 support
- cant use DOH because of root certificate?
- overlapping with other security software & you can install bitdefender first and then other security software, but thats known risk
- search advisor buggy
- cant configure
- ram usage?


Overall = Its good install & forget, i would install it on elders & happyclickers ( kids) computer it definitely keeps them clean
For me its just boring as you cant configure it

Im back to wd + cf myself, was good hype train though

 

[Trooper]

I ditched it as well. Back to WD and SF as well. For pretty much the same reasons as you all aside from what I posted over the weekend. For me, I had an image so I just restored back. But yeah the uninstall is a mess.

 

[SeriousHoax]

Those who uninstalled should try to delete the "smartdb_Volume(b731de 13-d6f2-4b75-99b****.sdb" file Bitdefender left in the "Syetem Volume Information" of each partition.
Yeah, it's present in each partition
@Minimalist made me aware of it in another thread.
Even Kaspersky leaves a file named "klBackupDepository.dat" in the "System Volume Information". Kaspersky left this file in both partition of my SSD, but wasn't present in the HDD partition. TBH, I'm disappointed at both's uninstall process due to this. They shouldn't write files into locations they can't remove.
As per user Minimalist's suggestion, I booted up my Macrium boot USB and used CMD to delete them.

 

[Minimalist]

Those who uninstalled should try to delete the "smartdb_Volume(b731de 13-d6f2-4b75-99b****.sdb" file Bitdefender left in the "Syetem Volume Information" of each partition.
Yeah, it's present in each partition
@Minimalist made me aware of it in another thread.
Even Kaspersky leaves a file named "klBackupDepository.dat" in the "System Volume Information". Kaspersky left this file in both partition of my SSD, but wasn't present in the HDD partition. TBH, I'm disappointed at both's uninstall process due to this. They shouldn't write files into locations they can't remove.
As per user Minimalist's suggestion, I booted up my Macrium boot USB and used CMD to delete them.

For me Kaspersky left those files on first partitions of my SSDs and not the others (I have more than one partition per SSD). BD left it's files on all partitions on all drives - same as with you.
It also left bunch of BIN files in c:\programdata for me.

 

[RansomwareRemediation]

For me Kaspersky left those files on first partitions of my SSDs and not the others (I have more than one partition per SSD). BD left it's files on all partitions on all drives - same as with you.
It also left bunch of BIN files in c:\programdata for me.

Be careful with partitioning SSDS since it takes away their useful life, that's what I have read and investigated, the fewer partitions an SSD has, the better. I have uninstalled both Kaspersky and Bitdefender and have never had a problem. Greetings

 

[Tutman]

Bitdefender Free using about 250 mb ram for me and my family member PC still has F-secure safe and it is using abut 400 mb.

 

[Miyagi]

I, too, ditched after trying for a day. PC temperature was higher than normal and the fan kept going. Trying F-Secure now.