WD has amazing performance results for most of daily activities:
Bootup time, application startup time (already installed), CPU usage / Memory usage / Physical disk usage / Network usage (on idle), web browsing, document viewing/editing, gaming, playing/ watching media.
WD has below average performance for file management (copying/moving many files), making archives/backups of many files, opening folders with many executables (first time after reboot), installing/uninstalling complex applications, full scans. These activities are not performed frequently, so they are not so important for many users. For example, making a full scan is required only after being infected.
My laptop has a i5-5200U with two cores so not a very powerful one and WD runs very well for day to day activities.
I use an i3 laptop 8th Gen + HDD. I don't copy loads of files. WD runs fine. K did too when I tried it.
Just the type of hands-on experience I was looking for, much appreciatedUsed both on the Dell Inspiron 570 MT(D005744) of my parents.
It has an AMD Athlon X2 240, 2GB of ram and a 320GB HDD.
Very underpowered by today's standards.
Kaspersky was unworkable for me, but the system is still running Windows 10 1909 with Windows Defender set to high by ConfigureDefender and the commended settings of Hard_Configurator. Boot and program launches are slow, but when they are running there is absolutely no issue anymore. I would suggest you try them both (KSC Free and WD) each for a week and see what works best for you.
Nope, in the latter cases I'd have to prioritize performance, losing scanning efficiency obviously.
What could one use in th that scenario?
One of my laptops is an i3-32030/6gb RAM, WD was ok, and i rather use it with WD than any 3rd party AVs.Looking mainly for usage on underpowered systems. Best case are i3/i5 laptops, with up to 3rd/4th gen CPUs.
Definitely!First thing you have to start with is the OS that is installed. That will be your first limiter. Next will be the hardware.
Even though I'm writing this on my Ryzen desktop pc, in the morning I read your posts and replied using an Atom Z-based Dell tablet. Had W8, upgraded to W10. Also have a 7-year old Celeron netbook, "revived" back to life by the graces of a small SSD, on which I have webroot installed.On a lot of older hardware, W10 is blocked by MS from installing - which means you won't have WD as an option. And everybody who has been push Windows Defender here is talking about Windows Defender on W10.
Is this a released thing? Can it be used without a AV alongside? Do you trust it (Chinese startup company and the like)I would test WisVector since it is free.
One of my laptops is an i3-32030/6gb RAM, WD was ok, and i rather use it with WD than any 3rd party AVs.
However, now it run Linux MX18, which is way more safer and lighter than any Windows. It doesn't need any AV, i slightly hardened it with AppArmor and Firejail.
When i was an Hardcore Gamer, i had a dedicated gaming rig , only games and required softs to communicate with my teammates, i did nothing sensitive on it.A small number of friends did that. Most can't due to the need for gaming etc.
MX runs XFCE which is the lightest desktop available on Linux. you don't need a dedicated graphic card.I'd agree with safer btw, not necessarily with lighter (graphics in mind).