Chocobito Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Personally I prefer ESS to NOD32 because IMON in both version work like a proxy and all the data pass this, so if you use Windows Firewall the only program that will try to connect to the web is ekrn.exe, but the ESS Firewall identifies all program that pass through ekrn.exe ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted July 8, 2009 Administrator Share Posted July 8, 2009 There is no end to the argument. I would just say that with Eset SS , you will be able to monitor your connection the better way. And keep it away from problems. I have an example, few days ago I downloaded a keygen that contained a trojan horse, ESET couldn't clean it, I quickly search Microsoft Malware Protection Center for the threat's info, I found about the trojan that it didn't do any damage to the PC if it(the trojan) was not allow to access the internet. They had also listed the port the trojan used. I simply made a rule in the firewall which didn't allow the trojan to access the internet at all. Thus no damage was done and I use the keygen happily.;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 @DKT27:ESS may have stopped the trojan from initiating a connection, but it didn't stop it from running.It would have been a different story if their firewall has HIPS (e.g., COMODO, Online Armor, Outpost...)That is why it's better to have separate AV, Firewall, etc. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White.Socks Posted July 8, 2009 Author Share Posted July 8, 2009 mhhh all these comments do confuse me.... some say just AV NOD32 then again some say ESET SS....but right..... thats the thought i also had while i wasthinking about which one i will choose while weighting the pros and cons....well a pro imo is definatly the possibility to watch the in and outgoing network connections with which ESET SS comes... what now ?deinstall NOD32 AV and reinstall ESET SS ??? just because of the network connection feature ?would it make sense using NOD32 AV and COMODO firewall in my case ?i mean as u may know ( lol ) i asked if this makes sense in my case...i just want a clear answer ! ( dont get me wrong here, i appreciate all the help and time u spend for helping me )AM I VULNERABLE WITHOUT FIREWALL AND MS FIREALL TURNED OFF WHEN I AM BEHIND A ROUTER ???? ( and the router internal firewall is on ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeetPirate Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 mhhh all these comments do confuse me.... some say just AV NOD32 then again some say ESET SS....but right..... thats the thought i also had while i wasthinking about which one i will choose while weighting the pros and cons....well a pro imo is definatly the possibility to watch the in and outgoing network connections with which ESET SS comes... what now ?deinstall NOD32 AV and reinstall ESET SS ??? just because of the network connection feature ?would it make sense using NOD32 AV and COMODO firewall in my case ?i mean as u may know ( lol ) i asked if this makes sense in my case...i just want a clear answer ! ( dont get me wrong here, i appreciate all the help and time u spend for helping me )AM I VULNERABLE WITHOUT FIREWALL AND MS FIREALL TURNED OFF WHEN I AM BEHIND A ROUTER ???? ( and the router internal firewall is on )I don't think any of us answer than question for you, all we have is our opinions and experience. The best thing for you would be to give it a try and see if you like it, this is the only way for you to know if you prefer the added features presented by the firewall software. My experience would tell you just set up the hardware firewall correctly and sit back and relax because I have been using the internet since 1996 on windows 95, lol, I never used a software firewall, only antivirus and never had a problem. Since I had broadband I fixed up a linux box gateway router which by default blocks all kinds of threats but I added some of my own to block dns rebinding attacks and hook all dns queries to ensure every dns query from within my network gets forced to use the opendns system regardless of the settings on the computer. Things like this block the conficker virus and plenty other bots. I recommend you set your dns servers to opendns in your router settings and ignore your isp dns servers.If you wish to try ESS then there is no need to remove EAV first, just install ESS over it and it will work just fine. If you want to try out a firewall with EAV then try online armour first as I believe it presents its data in a more elegant and user friendly manner, then you can try out comodo firewall. Basically after a few months if the only things being detected by the firewall are false positives then you may prefer to remove the firewall software; If you get legitimate threat detections then you should keep it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White.Socks Posted July 8, 2009 Author Share Posted July 8, 2009 thx for your good answer first..... now ive got another question though.... can i use both ? comodo and online armour firewall at the same time ? to see which one i like more ?or lets say appears more "user friendly " to me ?or will this produce errors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeetPirate Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 thx for your good answer first..... now ive got another question though.... can i use both ? comodo and online armour firewall at the same time ? to see which one i like more ?or lets say appears more "user friendly " to me ?or will this produce errorsNever tried it before but you could try it. If anything crashes you could just remove one or reboot in safe mode and uninstall one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 @LeetPirate:2 or more software firewall is not recommended, as it will only cause unstable network connection.So folks, if you want to install a commercial firewall don't forget to turn off M$ built-in firewall :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted July 9, 2009 Administrator Share Posted July 9, 2009 If you have a fast PC, go for external firewall + AV Only. Otherwise internal built-in firewall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White.Socks Posted July 9, 2009 Author Share Posted July 9, 2009 i have a 2 x 2.0 GHZ Dual Core ( intel )3 GB DDR2 RAMand ATI HD 4850 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 @White.Socks:Your computer can handle the latest AV + Firewall :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted July 9, 2009 Administrator Share Posted July 9, 2009 i have a 2 x 2.0 GHZ Dual Core ( intel )3 GB DDR2 RAMand ATI HD 4850Now that's what you call a standard and a good specs PC. Yea you surely can handle AV + Third party Firewall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White.Socks Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 mhh i play thats it why...... otherwise i wouldnt use such a pc.......i dont think its fast btw... good the gpu is fast RAM is ok too, but the cpu sucks.... im thinking about getting an Q6600 ( 4 x 2.4 GHZ ) or an E8400 C2D ( 2 x 3.0 GHZ )i already have the board though... a sockel 775 board so the new cpu would fit directly without buying a new motherboard as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumble Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition (3.2GHZ), only 180 euro's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted July 10, 2009 Administrator Share Posted July 10, 2009 Gaming machine = AMD. Normally good machine = Intel.2 x 3.0 GHZ is always faster than 4 x 2.4 GHZ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White.Socks Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 i had the same thought.... but i think in future Quad Cores will be more effective than Dual Cores can ever be... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White.Socks Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 lol why gaming machine AMD ? intel cpus were always faster than AMDs as far as i can remember...not much at all but they were... at least thats my expierence... may have changed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted July 10, 2009 Administrator Share Posted July 10, 2009 Yes quad cores have a future. If I want to get one, I will surly go for quad core but currently duo core 2 are the fastest. No program is able to use all of the 4 cores properly. Maybe after 1 year or so.I use Intel, I like Intel, I will only use Intel, some engineers tell Intel processors can stay for a lifetime, they are just being hypothetical, I don't like AMD.I have heard about it hundreds of times that is why I wrote AMD = gaming machine.I play games, play it efficiently, only on Intel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeetPirate Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 i had the same thought.... but i think in future Quad Cores will be more effective than Dual Cores can ever be...Yes, the problem is that the hardware is way beyond the capabilities of the software right now and it is very difficult for programmers to design multi-threaded applications because of the extra work and cost involved usually only high quality software and some games are multi core capable. As it stands the quad cores depend on new operating systems like vista and win7 to distribute the work load as best as possible.lol why gaming machine AMD ? intel cpus were always faster than AMDs as far as i can remember...not much at all but they were... at least thats my expierence... may have changedBoth can be used for gaming machines, intel used to be faster than amd because of their nasty corporate espionage back in the old days they used to hold back information from AMD wilfully to keep them behind. That is a long story and is a thing of the past. The reality now is that for a very long time since AMD brought out the hammer architectire (K8), they have consistently been producing better quality cpus than intel. Many people might disagree but I am not making fanboy statements, I am merely stating facts. If you were to read the data sheets for the AMD cpus based on the hammer architecture you will see they only have like 40-something bugs in their design whereas intel's core architecture has hundreds of bugs that they force microsoft and other OS makers to produce software workarounds because intel refuses to fix certain bugs. These are the things the intel marketing hides from the public. Have you ever noticed that AMD does not waste money on advertisements but instead focuses on producing high quality chips? Even now the core 2 duo and i7 architectures are loaded with hardware bugs that are set to never be fixed according to the intel errata sheets.The fact remains that you could spend half the money on an AMD CPU and get equal performance of an overpriced intel CPU, the benchmarks are head to head. Some benchmarks are biased by running a core 2 duo against a previous generation AMD architecture, the only thing the core 2 duo can do faster is encode HD video but the thing is that the programs are usually optimised for intel cpu features and why pay 100USD more for a CPU just to get 2 seconds faster encoding on a benchmark? Never forget the hundreds of bugs on the intel chips that force microsoft to create software patches and workarounds. I no longer support intel after I realised the nasty dishonest tactics they used to keep AMD behind, I refuse to support people who would go so low to ensure their rivals stay down. This is the same kind of dishonest things that nvidia does. Even though I am packing an nvidia card in my system, I don't like nvidia for the things they do. When ATI came out with a better video card that blew away the nvidia top gun in their own game Assassin's Creed, nvidia forced the game makers to release a patch for the game to disable all the DirectX 10.1 optimisations to ensure that the nvidia cards benchmark higher. I will never support such corporate bullies again, now that I know the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White.Socks Posted July 11, 2009 Author Share Posted July 11, 2009 sure u can also an AMDs cpu for a gaming rig... it not that important if u have 52 fps or 48 fps -.- ( ok it may be ;D when u have 28 Fps vs 32 Fps )yes, i read about that assassins creed thingy...btw ( im no fanboy lol i know u didnt meant it )but its right that AMD never made much or that much advertisement as INTEL does........ however, i always, and i always will buy hardware depending on its performance not depending on the brand...its just like with ATI graphic cards sooo many ppl think these cards are bad ! lol even then if they never have seen a benchmark or used one..i dont know why this is.... but its strange ppl always tend to nvidia and so ppl will always tend to intel dont ask me why i just lay the facts down... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted July 11, 2009 Administrator Share Posted July 11, 2009 I use ATI. I am very satisfied by it. As far as AMD is concerned. Once my cousin had an AMD processor, I was not satisfied at all when I used his PC.Once my Intel processor got over heated and shut down my PC about 15-20 time in a day because of the fan that was not fixed properly. Didn't create a scratch on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeetPirate Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 sure u can also an AMDs cpu for a gaming rig... it not that important if u have 52 fps or 48 fps -.- ( ok it may be ;D when u have 28 Fps vs 32 Fps )yes, i read about that assassins creed thingy...btw ( im no fanboy lol i know u didnt meant it )but its right that AMD never made much or that much advertisement as INTEL does........ however, i always, and i always will buy hardware depending on its performance not depending on the brand...its just like with ATI graphic cards sooo many ppl think these cards are bad ! lol even then if they never have seen a benchmark or used one..i dont know why this is.... but its strange ppl always tend to nvidia and so ppl will always tend to intel dont ask me why i just lay the facts down...Yea don't worry that fanboy statement was meant for myself, so nobody will think I am just making fanatic statements, lol. :lmao: You are quite right in your sayings, most people will tend towards intel and nvidia because they know of it or have heard of it somewhere. I was like that when I was a teenager, I was a walking intel and nvidia fanboy :D. When I got older I realised the reason I liked intel was because I didn't take the time to learn about AMD at all. My current desktop is an AMD dual core but I still bought into the intel marketing and my notebook is a core 2 duo, LOL. I benchmarked both of them with HD video encoding because I do alot of that and it turned out that they were both equal except the AMD on my desktop cost under $100US, lol.One thing I don't like about the new intel cpu's is the new numbering system specifically designed to fool customers into thinking the higher processor number means a better/faster cpu. I see this happening often but most of the time the smaller core 2 duo numbers are newer and better like the T3400. This is what intel says "...the new transistors (45nm) leak less energy, produce less heat and switch faster (than 65nm). Nearly doubling the density of our processors means leaps in performance, an up-to-50-percent larger L2 cache, and new levels of breakthrough energy-efficiency." This statement is true across the board so for anyone thinking to buy a new cpu soon, be sure you pick the one with the smallest nanometer process.Seems like this discussion has taken quite the turn and we are severely off topic :D so while I do enjoy talking to you guys about hardware and stuff I think this should be my last reply about cpu stuff, hehe. I really do enjoy a good hardware chat though :D. @DKT27: Yea don't worry, all new cpus have built-in thermal diode protection these days, they will safely shutdown even if you try powering it up without a heatsink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted July 11, 2009 Administrator Share Posted July 11, 2009 It is an 3-4 year old processor. And yes I agree with you. I just don't want to be out of the box. It good to see an experienced CPU user. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White.Socks Posted July 11, 2009 Author Share Posted July 11, 2009 not really having a problem with beeing off topic since nobody replys to that anymore :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.