Have you used SHP before?

  • Yes, but I no longer use it

  • No, I have never used it

  • Yes, and I am still using it

  • No, but I plan to try it soon

Results are only viewable after voting.

Al-Faqir

Level 8
Verified
I tried it for few days, full scan + few days of time to settle down and it was taking as much memory than on first day still.

Hitman pro is from sophos also, but i feel like its lacking something compared to malwarebytes, zemana etc.

Sophos home premium is nice software, i like the dashboard and free version features, also with current tech we have it shouldnt be problem to run it

If you compare it to kis, kis will probably win yeah.

But if you compare sophos home premium free into KFA19, it will be even/ tie game
View attachment 194404

View attachment 194405

The process "Performs virus scanning and disinfection" was using up to 400 MBs of Ram yesterday.

View attachment 194406
Resources consumption is nearly the half now of what it was yesterday (400 MBs of ram e.g.)
 

Slyguy

Level 42
Verified
That was what I was experiencing until yesterday. Today everything is normal and the system is very responsive.
Your persistence paid off. What SHP has to do is cache everything as I noted. Once it's cached then it's smooth as silk and SPEEDY. Also, it appears it was needing to serve some updates to you in the background. Those updated modules are the ones everyone is on that claims SHP is lightweight.

I assure you, once fully cached, and fully updated, after that reboot most people will be impressed at how lightweight it becomes!
 

kev216

Level 20
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Would it be worth testing it for a week? Sophos home premium 'FREE'...seems free doesnt have advanced real time protection at all
Free version has signatures, web protection, PUP protection and some behaviour blocking in the form of file reputation and fully automatic hips that blocks processes with suspicious behaviour.
The more advanced stuff is in the premium version.
 

Moonhorse

Level 26
Verified
Content Creator
Free version has signatures, web protection, PUP protection and some behaviour blocking in the form of file reputation and fully automatic hips that blocks processes with suspicious behaviour.
The more advanced stuff is in the premium version.
Doesnt sound too bad to be free product, i had it installed two days max... removed due high ram usage, even it doesnt matter at all. Sly said it will settle down, just needs bit of time, but i rushed and uninstalled.

Maybe i give it a week, to see does the constant memory scanning stops and it settles down completely
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and Al-Faqir

stefanos

Level 24
Verified
Doesnt sound too bad to be free product, i had it installed two days max... removed due high ram usage, even it doesnt matter at all. Sly said it will settle down, just needs bit of time, but i rushed and uninstalled.

Maybe i give it a week, to see does the constant memory scanning stops and it settles down completely
If I have to choose between two free products that consume a lot of ram, and without options I will choose Bitdefender free. Better virus signatures and very good BB for free product. Is my personal opinion.
 

Moonhorse

Level 26
Verified
Content Creator
If I have to choose between two free products that consume a lot of ram, and without options I will choose Bitdefender free. Better virus signatures and very good BB for free product. Is my personal opinion.
I would just go kfa over bd, What makes sophos different is dashboard, web filtering is nice addition and rest stated above @kev216 Never tried bitdefender on Windows 10 yet, so thanks for suggestion its nice software aswell
 

Al-Faqir

Level 8
Verified
@Al-Faqir Glad to hear that it has worked out for you! Once it caches everything, its light as a feather IMO!
Your persistence paid off. What SHP has to do is cache everything as I noted. Once it's cached then it's smooth as silk and SPEEDY. Also, it appears it was needing to serve some updates to you in the background. Those updated modules are the ones everyone is on that claims SHP is lightweight.

I assure you, once fully cached, and fully updated, after that reboot most people will be impressed at how lightweight it becomes!
Indeed it is very light! Navigating through folders is much fast. KIS caused unnoticeable delay. I like SHP very much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and Slyguy

Al-Faqir

Level 8
Verified
Free version has signatures, web protection, PUP protection and some behaviour blocking in the form of file reputation and fully automatic hips that blocks processes with suspicious behaviour.
The more advanced stuff is in the premium version.
The free version of Sophos should be more efficient than WD. I am so glad that I had received a free 1-year subscription for trying the beta.

Doesnt sound too bad to be free product, i had it installed two days max... removed due high ram usage, even it doesnt matter at all. Sly said it will settle down, just needs bit of time, but i rushed and uninstalled.

Maybe i give it a week, to see does the constant memory scanning stops and it settles down completely
The ram thing made me go mad and the system was very heavy and unresponsive. After days, you will not notice Sophos is running.

If I have to choose between two free products that consume a lot of ram, and without options I will choose Bitdefender free. Better virus signatures and very good BB for free product. Is my personal opinion.
If I am going to install BD some day, which I would never do, Bitdefender has to pay me for that. One of the worst, if not the worst, products I have ever tried. Just remembering how buggy it was makes me sick. It might have become better but I can't forgive the pain it caused LOL.

I would just go kfa over bd, What makes sophos different is dashboard, web filtering is nice addition and rest stated above @kev216 Never tried bitdefender on Windows 10 yet, so thanks for suggestion its nice software aswell
Personally, If I am going to install a free antivirus, I would only go for Sophos. KFA seems good for the members here are praising it. The paid version of Kaspersky is by no doubt much better than the free one.

KFA is one perfect free product. Not use many ram and have system watcher. My comment was about products that consume a lot of ram and without options.
I don't mind if the product consumes much ram but it should not cause any system slowdowns. KIS is very light and so is Sophos (after some painful days).
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlBo and stefanos

stefanos

Level 24
Verified
The free version of Sophos should be more efficient than WD. I am so glad that I had received a free 1-year subscription for trying the beta.



The ram thing made me go mad and the system was very heavy and unresponsive. After days, you will not notice Sophos is running.



If I am going to install BD some day, which I would never do, Bitdefender has to pay me for that. One of the worst, if not the worst, products I have ever tried. Just remembering how buggy it was makes me sick. It might have become better but I can't forgive the pain it caused LOL.



Personally, If I am going to install a free antivirus, I would only go for Sophos. KFA seems good for the members here are praising it. The paid version of Kaspersky is by no doubt much better than the free one.



I don't mind if the product consumes much ram but it should not cause any system slowdowns. KIS is very light and so is Sophos (after some painful days).
Yes i respect your opinion. But for me is important the results. And SHP after 2, 3 tests from Evjls Rain is not good. The free version is very weak for me. The rest is what you like or what i like
 
  • Like
Reactions: Al-Faqir and AtlBo

Slyguy

Level 42
Verified
Yes i respect your opinion. But for me is important the results. And SHP after 2, 3 tests from Evjls Rain is not good. The free version is very weak for me. The rest is what you like or what i like
Tossing a pack of malware at SHP on a local machine neglects some of the most important protections it offers. Under real-world conditions, SHP should provide unprecedented protection. Largely because of it's robust exploit protection, strong web filtration database and ridiculously good heuristic web evaluation technology. Even so, one of my favorite combos is SHP+VS/OSA+Heimdal. Very speedy, lightweight, and I'd put that combo up against any malware execution test on the planet.