Our forums are currently in maintenance mode and the ability to post is disabled. We will be back up and running as soon as possible. Thanks for your patience!

General discussion


too fast?

By koz365 ·
can a CPU and Motherboard be so fast as to not support an antivirus program? I ask because i was told that a certaint pc at my job can't have antivirus program because of the speed messes up the program and causes the machine to freeze up...any comments?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

by Jellimonsta In reply to too fast?

I doubt the problems would be because of a CPU being too fast. I imagine it could be too slow, or there may even be insufficient memory.

Collapse -

Sounds like someone is feeding you a line

by JimHM In reply to too fast?

I haven't heard of anything like that unless the Antivirus software was made for DOS or Windows 3.5.

Sounds more like its an OS compatability problem than a speed issue.

Collapse -

Sounds like someone missed the issue

by Oz_Media In reply to too fast?

If a PC is freezing up becuase of AV, I'd have to question the Admin. I have also never heard of a PC being too fast for software. Is it possible it the PC BIOS or another problem? I'd LOVE to see it myself and try to figure out what the REAL problem is.

try ABGFREE edition, it'll run anywhere on just about anything, SUCCESSFULLY!

Collapse -

Speed problems

by generalist In reply to too fast?

I have run into a few programs where the speed of the CPU creates problems. In most instances the problems stem from having to deal with a hardware interface that just doesn't have the ability to keep up with things.

Can you specify which antivirus software is causing the problem and what speed the various hardware modules are running at?

Collapse -

Yes it is eminently possible folks!

by GuruOfDos In reply to too fast?

But only in certain contexts...there always has to be a qualifier, doesn't there?!!

I have a PC in my office that is 'too fast for antivirus software'.

Let me start again.

I have a PC in the office which NEEDS to be fast for a certain mission critical task. Putting anti-virus software on the computer WILL affect the performance of this particular task. Realtime scanning would 'kill' the system dead, and scheduled scanning would interfere with the mission critical task. However, when the machine is idle, it gets scanned remotely via virus scanning software which can scan network drives.

What, you might ask, is so mission critical that it cannot be interrupted by a virus scanner (or indeed ANY background process)?

We build simulator systems. How they work and what they do is of no consequence in the scope of this discussion. What is relevant is the task for which the particular pc is used.

The system is used as a digital video recorder. Not in the sense of 'home media' or recording from the tv, but for creating extremely high quality video scenarios for our systems.

The original source material is often taken from uMatic or other high band analogue broadcast formats and has to be transferred from videotape to hard disk in real time. We do not use any compression methods during the capture stage...the footage is converted on the fly to raw digital data with a resolution of 768 x 576 (broadcast PAL) and a quantisation level of 16 bits per colour. This means a raw (sustained) data transfer rate of around 7Mbyte per second, and this has to be sustained over the duration of the tape, which could be as long as three hours. Obviously, the processor needs to be as fast as possible to ensure that no frames are dropped. Any background process or anything which interrupts flow of data to the hard disk during the capture process has to be avoided at all costs. Naturally, the end product of the process is going to be an avi or mpg file using whichever compression codec we choose, but encoding the data can take as long as it takes, and if something slows the system down during that stage it isn't an issue. The actual data capture is the key process. The better the quality of the capture, the better the end result. If the source media is less than perfect because of dropped frames, 'noise' or glitches caused by a background process interrupting data transfer, you won't get a decent final edit. The old adage applies - you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

There is one other situation I have encountered where a processor IS genuinely too fast for antivirus software. A similar issue occurred with a certain CPU being 'too fast' for an operating system!

Remember a few years ago, when the very best processors ran at around the 300MHz mark? Well, AMD brought out a 350MHz version of the K6-2 processor. The mainstream operating systems of the time were Windows 95 and Windows NT4. 98 was out but only had a market penetration of some 5%. When you upgraded from the 300 to the 350 K6-2, Windows 95 started 'rolling sevens'. There was actually a timing loop somewhere in the operating system which was upset by AMD processors 350MHz or faster, and Microsoft had to issue a fix for the problem. You couldn't even install 95 on a machine with a 350 or higher AMD. It would install, but on first boot, it would often die horribly. Applying the 'fix' cured the problem. I have used perhaps 20 or so AV programs over the years and I DID encounter three lesser-known packages that were processor speed dependent. That is, on CPU speeds above a certain point, the software rolled a seven the way that W95 would if you didn't apply the patch! A program called AVG (I don't remember the release version) had the problem on anything faster than 266Mhz cpu's.

Of course it may not be the actual speed of the cpu that is causing the problem. It may be the make of the CPU itself. There was a known issue with drivers for the old Voodoo2 accelerator cards. They would work on ANY machine at ANY speed.....unless the processor was an AthlonXP! Somebody DID write a set of Voodoo drivers for the AthlonXP, and naturally there was a demand for them. It sounds to me like if speed or cpu type IS an issue for this users AV software, then it's most likely it's an older package which was written before processors got so fast or before the particular model of processor was made.

I remember another similar issue with software and drivers for the Soundblaster Live! PCI128. When Intel changed the design of the Celeron and PII to 'Coppermine', the drivers refused to work. Nobody believed this at the time, but Creative Labs DID actually work out that the CPU core WAS the problem and they released a fix!

Collapse -

by Jellimonsta In reply to Yes it is eminently possi ...

Interesting comments Mike. I am not sure of the likelihood of this user having the same issues though. Unless they have a brand new PC system with the fastest processor available and they found the AV solution on an old 5 1/4 out back :)

Collapse -

I AM running the fastest processor...

by GuruOfDos In reply to

possible and DO use an AV program I found 'out back'.

The video editor machine is running a water-cooled (office warming!) 4GHz Athlon (yes I hold my hand up and admit IS overclocked...the PCI bus IS running at 41MHz!).

Having had nothing but problems with Norton (it keeps letting new stuff slip through!) I reverted to my old copy of Trend PC Cillin 2002 from the driver disk that came with a mobo about two years ago! Not only does it update far more often than Norton and seems to spot more nasties, it lets me scan the network drives from one PC and it has a firewall built in which is easier to use than the Symantec offering AND works harmoniously with the hardware firewall AND XP's built in firewall!

Collapse -

by Jellimonsta In reply to I AM running the fastest ...

I hope you buckle up when you drive that thing Mike. Stay out the bars beforehand too :)
Someone may get hurt P

Collapse -

I'm not daft!

by GuruOfDos In reply to

I have a KVM line Cat5 line-driver and operate it 'remotely' from another desk, in another office, in the building next door. Don't you just LOVE Extron interfacing products (keyboard, mouse and monitor plugged into a little box the size of a cigarette packet...similar box connected to PC. One Cat5 cable between the two!!! Up to 1.5km between monitor and PC and still use 1280 x1040 resolution!!!! YEEEEE-HARRRRRRRR!)

You think I WANT to be anywhere near it when she lets rip?!!! No sir-ee!!

Actually, if you want the truth, I can't be bothered to walk down the stairs, out of one door in another door and up another set of stairs, just to see how the thing is doing....that is NOT how us techies do things, is it!!!! Why walk 100 yards four or five times a day when you can spend $100 on a solution and save your excercise for the coffee machine and jogging the 8 miles to and from the office!!

Collapse -


by koz365 In reply to I'm not daft!

yea coffee

Related Discussions

Related Forums