How does CAV compare to NOD32?

I’m currently using NOD32 antivirus on my WINXP SP2 system. When my current license expires in a few months, I may want to try CAV. Does anyone know how CAV compares to NOD32? I guess I’m wondering if it’s good enough to use instead of renewing my license for NOD32.

For example, I have a 2 year license on Outpost Pro firewall, but ran into a few problems. I tried Comodo firewall and so far I see no reason to go back to Outpost Pro. I was curious if I could follow the same path with their Anti Virus software.

Comodo Antivirus is a new product I have tried it myself and found no problems except for the file submitting glitch, which has been fixed. But wether a product is better or worse then another is a matter of opinion. I am waiting until my subscription expires on my other antivirus program before switching to Comodo Antivirus, when it expires I will do much more to test it then I did with my first tests, to see how it has improved and how good detections is. At the moment Comodo Antivirus is brand new program and needs a little time to get better before I will consider completely switching to it. So for you I recommend that when your subscription expires to your current program, give Comodo Antivirus a fair try and see what you think.

I am testing CAV for a week now. For the moment is has some optimization problems at least when it scans some very large compressed files and sometimes gives faulse positives.
But consider that it is in early development stage. The support team informed me that they are costantly improving it. One thing is for sure they update on daily basis their virus database. I suggest that you should give it a try.

ps.For the moment NOD32 is faster.

I’m using NOD32, first I used a Trial and must confess I felt in love with it. In the past I was a Norton man and used it until NAV 2006.

So I comment this because NOD32 is the fastest and smallest footprint AV software either freeware or paid. And it’s pretty robust, secure and efficient.

I’ve not tried CAV and my licence for NOD32 will expire until March 2007. If I’m able to try CAV in another computer I’ll comment.

Anyway. If CPF has a small footprint and is very secure then It’ll be the next king

We have used NOD32 at work for a number of years and in my opinion it is the best AV product available–period. Fast, small, unobtrusive, and always perfect, but it isn’t free. At home I prefer the Comodo Personal Firewall to the only other free firewall I have much experience with, ZoneAlarm, but CAV is still too green for me to rely on, especially when compared to AVG, which I have used for years. My main problem with CAV is its drag on my system performance, frequently gobbling up 100% of my CPU (an old PII 400) for long periods. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get CPF to work with AVG’s email scanner, so I am now trying Avast along with CPF–so far so good.

Jim W

I agree with you jimwhitend

NOD32 is the best antivirus period…

So CAV needs to be a fast, reliable, low resource usage and efficient antivirus.

…and that we will be!!! Watch us make it happen :wink:


Comodo was tested on some viruses take a look. may be oyuve seen it but some not.

Hi Melih, from your last post and by reading the link I can see the efforts you guys are making in order to improve CAV. Keep on the great work !

I remember when CPF was a childish firewall compared to the big ones… And now with the latest CPF version I must say that CPF is so far the best firewall ever made !!! keep the same work to CAV and in a near future we’ll see a turn around !

NOD32 is my gold standard as well. Watching CAV evolve should be interesting. I fully expect Comodo to deliver a world class program like NOD, but also expect them to put a new twist/wrinklle in there as well.

The next release of CAVS is certainly going to have a new wrinkle! :wink: Rather than focussing primarily on detection, there will be a new, outer layer that is focussed on prevention. If it cant get in, it doesn’t matter. How the AV comparative sites handle this, I don’t know. They operate on the basis of how good an app is in removing something that got in.

What do you measure if the bad stuff cant get in, in the first place?

Ewen :slight_smile:

I agree that this is an excellent approach. An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. Other companies are heading this direction too. If you look at On-line Armor by Tall Emu for example. They combine a HIPS program that covers executeables as well as entry points with Kaspersky antivirus. This year they are also adding a firewall. I think that this approach is superior. There are other programs like process guard, safety system monitor, antihook all of which also take the HIPS prevntion approach. But the last 3 have not combined that with an antivirus product (not to mention, many of these applications are not free). I really think that this is the way of the future and that you guys are really onto something.

However, detection is still important as for sure, CAVS will be installed on many a machine that will be infected already.

The hardest part in my opinion will be:

  1. Keeping resource use low. and
  2. Keeping it simple. Many HIPS programs force the end user to make too many decisions. On that note, some users want to make decisions. So possibly you have setting on the hips such as “begginner, intermediate, and advanced” with each level giving the end user more control.

I really like what I am hearing guys!

  1. Making the HIPS program so that it doesn’t

Don’t forget it’s also going to have a HUGE database of known applications, and users will be able to submit unknown files for analysis and incorporation. This will go a long way towards making the HIPS way less “noisy” for users than other HIPS.

Ewen :slight_smile:

wow :o the new approach for CAVS sounds pretty cool eh !

and also as many of us had expressed and IMHO it should be the top or second top priority and goal:

  1. make CAVS low on resources: the less CPU, RAM and HD Access the real time monitoring app could give the better CAVS should be. Since by doing so then there will be no performance lose

this comes in hand in one of my posts where I mention that now days the software is becoming more and more resource eaters !!! the best example:
Norton Antivirus 2006 !!! I uninstalled NAV 2006 and tried NOD32 and I really noticed a HUGE improvement in terms of performance and resources.

NOD32 is a clear example that you can create an advanced Antivirus & antimalware without degrading performance or consuming larger amounts of RAM… all of us know that NOD32 is superior than NAV2006 and for what comodo is posting about CAVS it seems comodo will do it again !!!


So from one NOD32 fan to another, what security set up are you using right now? I use NOD32, Comodo Firewall, and Spysweeper. I was using on-line armor but removed it. I liked the program, but it had conflicts with comodo.

Until CAVS is perfected, I need a HIPS program. I am considering Safety System Monitor to use with NOD and Comodo. With that set up, I could probably ditch Spysweeper.

I use the following: NOD32, Comodo Firewall, Spybot search & destroy, Lavasoft Ad-Aware and Spywareblaster.

if CAV changed to CAVS (S for Spyware) then in a near future my security apps should be just Comodo firewall and comodo antivirus.

BTW I’m really looking forward for comod productos internationalization, in my case having them in spanish language would be great, since many users wants to tie the software with the OS language and most of all, not all the users know English but are willing to use comodo products!