Which method for full computer scan is the best?

[REDACTED]

During my time using Avast, I've ran intermittent full scans on my computer, but since there seems to be three different ways of doing this, I'm not sure which one would be the best and most effective one. I've mainly used the method of simply going to My Computer folder, right clicking C: and selecting "Scan with Avast". However, with 372 gb of my C: disc space (with 27 gb remaining), this tends to take well over couple of hours to complete, pretty much three and half hours after updating my PC to Windows 10. "Full scan" option in Avast program itself usually takes only little less time than that. However, I've found that scan done with Avast's custom scan where I can choose scannable drives and folders tend to be much faster, even taking only half of time C: right click scan, while scan results have the equal number of scanned files, folders and gigabytes. However, since each scan method takes different time, does that mean that scan mathod that takes more time is more thorough or are all three different methods as good by default?

[Eddy]

If a scan takes more time, it doesn't just depend on the scan type but also the settings for that scan.
e.g. if you have pup detection enabled or not.

But there isn't a real need to run a scan unless you suspect to have malware.
avast scans things in real time.

avast for realtime protection + MBam for e.g. a weekly scan + McShield is what I recommend

[mchain]

+1 

File System Shield scans (which are the scans you are proposing) can only detect what is on your hard drive already.  In some cases, this means you are already infected.  Full system scans will only catch what is on your hard drive; usually detected files are ones for which there was no definition for them when they were saved at that moment in time.

So scheduling or manually scanning your system after the fact is rather pointless.  Real time scanning is the point and prevention is the key.

[bruce_b]

When you have a computer with a large hard drive, what should be done is to Partition the drive, so you have say a 60GB or so partition just for the Operating System and Installed Programs. All your offline downloads, like program installers and such, as well as personal data should be on another partition. When an infection occurs, just about every time, it hits the operating system so by keeping it a reasonable size, your scan will be much faster. It also makes it easier to create an Image (with something like Acronis) of just your OS area to restore when something happens. You can easily backup your downloads and personal data by just copying to another drive.

[bob3160]

When you have a computer with a large hard drive, what should be done is to Partition the drive, so you have say a 60GB or so partition just for the Operating System and Installed Programs. All your offline downloads, like program installers and such, as well as personal data should be on another partition. When an infection occurs, just about every time, it hits the operating system so by keeping it a reasonable size, your scan will be much faster. It also makes it easier to create an Image (with something like Acronis) of just your OS area to restore when something happens. You can easily backup your downloads and personal data by just copying to another drive.

That depends on the user - I tend to agree With Leo and not subscribe to partitioning my HD:
 https://askleo.com/should_i_partition_my_hard_disk/
It's another one of those user choices.

[bruce_b]

On a normal size hard drive (in my main pc it is only 120GB) I do not partition it. But if it is a brand new drive with no OS installed then partitioning is best as the OS can be a fairly small size, easy to back up and restore if an infection occurs. If the drive is larger than 250GB or so then I would use partitions.

[bob3160]

On a normal size hard drive (in my main pc it is only 120GB) I do not partition it. But if it is a brand new drive with no OS installed then partitioning is best as the OS can be a fairly small size, easy to back up and restore if an infection occurs. If the drive is larger than 250GB or so then I would use partitions.

Again, this is a user preference. I have a 2 TB drive and it's not partitioned, no problems and Windows keeps everything neat and clean.
Just like we have personal preferences for the browser we use, partitioning or not, is one of those user preferences.
In the older systems, it was also needed to partition a large HD in order to use all of it. That's no longer the case.

[mchain]

Partitioning a large HDD is, as bob3160 says, no longer required.  But, the real issue of partitioning remains:  What happens to all your backed up files and data when the non-OS partition dies, as does the OS system partition, when the large partitioned HDD gives up the ghost?

[bruce_b]

You do make a valid point. I backup my personal data files to another hard drive, as well as my Download and My Download Files directorys. That contains most of what I need. I also backup to the other drive, Bookmarks and any info from Outlook so it is not lost. Since my computer has only a 120GB drive, a full image is not very large and takes up about 65GB or so .. This is using Norton Ghost 2003 on Windows XP PRO SP3 .. Ghost reboots to DOS to run the image. The OP should be doing it in a similar way otherwise when it does fail, he will be left with a very long time to restore his system. As to virus scans, again, the smaller the OS section, the faster they will run and they should always be done in SAFE mode as some viruses can not be removed unless you are in Safe mode.

[Pondus]

As to virus scans, again, the smaller the OS section, the faster they will run and they should always be done in SAFE mode as some viruses can not be removed unless you are in Safe mode.

It is not as simple as that. There are pro and cons about safemode depending on different stuff

If a malware is related to a running process it may go undetected if not running in safemode
Some malware tools dont load all drivers in safemode and will not run fully functional .. eks malwarebytes

Many tools give a message after scan: This and that will be removed after reboot
Unless the tool instructions say other, use normal mode

[stibi]

]Again, this is a user preference. I have a 2 TB drive and it's not partitioned, no problems and Windows keeps everything neat and clean.

One important reason for partitioning is to divide all the installations (OS & applications) from the user data.

The data partition should be backuped some times in a week to have an actual backup at hand.

My OS partition which changes not often is saved by an image program after some months.

[bob3160]

]Again, this is a user preference. I have a 2 TB drive and it's not partitioned, no problems and Windows keeps everything neat and clean.

One important reason for partitioning is to divide all the installations (OS & applications) from the user data.

The data partition should be backuped some times in a week to have an actual backup at hand.

My OS partition which changes not often is saved by an image program after some months.

Mine isn't partitioned and when something goes wrong, my image backup restores everything.
Again, it's a personal preference. Not a requirement any more because the system can't address all of a large HD unless it's partitioned.

[stibi]

Again, it's a personal preference.

Sure. But it's much easier and much faster to save only my changed personal data daily instead of making an image for
all the installation crap that seldom changes 
This is my expierience from 30 years ...

[bob3160]

Again, it's a personal preference.

Sure. But it's much easier and much faster to save only my changed personal data daily instead of making an image for
all the installation crap that seldom changes 
This is my expierience from 30 years ...

Precisely why I said you do it your way,I do it my way. A personal preference.
I have changed over the years and yes, I also go back 30+ years and Commodore, and Windows 3.1, etc.
Currently, I use the latest Preview build of Windows 10.