Norton Security Suite Vs. Avast! 5.0 Free

[moneykidz9]

As a Comcast subscriber, I can download Norton for free. I've used Avast! in the past (V 4. and I was really surprised with the performance. However, I'm not sure which one to go for. McAfee slowed my laptop down to a halt.

Specs:
Intel Pentium M/Centrino 1.60Ghz
1GB ram.
100GB hard drive.
Windows XP Professional SP3.

Which one is better? And won't slow my laptop down? Thanks. 

[Yanto.Chiang]

Hi Sir,

My suggestion is you keep using avast! antivirus with your machine, because according to your tech specification that you using quite low technology same as like my home machines.

Norton always claimed themselves not need a huge resources to run it, but again you should specific to analyzed it again what is machine spec when norton trial it?

Because each AV vendor always claim that they can running heavylight on machine, but in real you will see what will happened in the field..

cheers,

[Light Archangel]

Even in old machines avast is very light!! 

The Specs of my Pc are:

Pentium III
256 MB RAM
1.0 Ghz
Windows XP Pro

And don't slow down my computer, according to the specs of your machine, with avast your PC Will fly and will be very well protected!! 

Greetings

[SHARKY7SHARKY]

If you can get Norton Security for free I would go for that this is very light on recourses now & a complete package IE Anti virus---Firewall etc The free avast 5 is not a Firewall plus.
Norton used to be very bloated in the past & still is too expensive.

[sg09]

I think you should go for Avast, 'coz it is very light on resources. If you need a firewall you can have PC Tools/Comodo v4/Online Armour free. SONAR of Norton produces huge false positive. I used Norton recently for a while and not impressed at all. It auto quarantines everything, even suspicious by SONAR.

[brockey01]

If you can get Norton Security for free I would go for that this is very light on recourses now & a complete package IE Anti virus---Firewall etc The free avast 5 is not a Firewall plus.
Norton used to be very bloated in the past & still is too expensive.

i would agree the norton IS 2010 is really fast and does well. But avast 5 free is good, but i would get for NIS 2010

[.: L' arc :.]

Norton is still heavy and requires a state-of-the-art PC just to run as smooth as how other AVs do on old PCs.

In detections and performance, as you can see, lots of free AVs are already catching up (or even outperforming) the paid ones.

[Asyn]

Even in old machines avast is very light!!  
The Specs of my Pc are:
Pentium III
256 MB RAM
1.0 Ghz
Windows XP Pro

wait, i can top that...

i still have an old system running...
Pentium I @133 Mhz
96 mb ram
Win 95
using avast 4.8.1368
runs quite smooth, except 4 the vps-updating. (set 2 manually, it takes up 2 10mins updating)
asyn

btw: getting back to the initial question... i would never use norton!
ps: u're in avast forum. (hint)

[yuerkxkbcwpfwb]

i am also a comcast subscriber eligible for 5 norton licenses - but i prefer avast 5 free, i'm using avast 5 free on many computers including my truecrypt whole disk encrypted netbook