Norton 360 and Atom CPU's

[krazynutz]

Hey everyone,

I have three computers: Two main rigs, both Core i7's running Win 7 x64, and one file/print server with an Atom D510 CPU running Win 7 x86. I went with the Atom D510 because that machine will be on 24/7 and I wanted to keep power consumption as low as possible.

I have Norton 360 v4 on all three machines and they're all on a gigabit network.

Transferring files between the two Core i7 rigs is extremely fast.
Transferring files from the file/print server to the Core i7 rigs is extremely fast.
Transferring files from the Core i7 rigs from the file/print server rig is 5x slower.

If I uninstall Norton 360 from the file/print server rig, file transfers from the Core i7 rigs is extremely fast again.

If I have Norton 360 installed on all three machines, why does it only affect the speed of files going TO the server and not FROM the server? Why isn't this a problem on the other two machines?

Is it an Atom CPU bottleneck?

Thanks,

 

[eibgrad]

Just a guess, but most of these anti-malware products provide "active" protection, which means they inspect EVERY SINGLE PACKET that enters the system (i.e., TO the server). OTOH, they couldn’t care less what they send out (i.e., FROM the server). Depending on the capabilities of the system, that may simply be too much for it. These ATOM processors can’t possibly compare to Core I7 processors in terms of performance and efficiency. Plus, you’ve placed a demanding OS (Win7) on top of it to add insult to injury.

What you may be able to do is to configure Norton 360 to exclude packet inspection between a specific machine, or several machines, or perhaps all local machines except the router, etc.

 

[krazynutz]

I know the Atom CPU's can't compare to the Core i7's. With Norton scanning each file, the Atom CPU chokes with this process? I have 2GB of RAM on Win 7 x86. Would adding more help?

All netbooks run Win 7 without issue and the Atom didn't lag at all without Norton installed. In fact, a 75MB file transferred to and from the server was instantaneous. Once Norton was installed, copying from the server is still instantaneous but copying to the server dropped to 5 seconds.

Like I said, I went with Atom to keep power down on a 24x7 server. Would a low-level Athlon or Celeron fair any better?

Thanks

 

[graywolf]

Removing Norton would help. Their programs are awful RAM hogs that can't tell a virus from a pig.

 

[krazynutz]

Removing Norton would help. Their programs are awful RAM hogs that can't tell a virus from a pig.

Actually, their latest builds are the least ram-using security apps out there I believe. The "ram hog" rap pertains to their older versions.

I upgraded to a Celeron e3300. The difference is night and day! A marginal watt-usage increase but worth it. All is well.

 

[graywolf]

Since I posted that on 4/4, I just read the reviews in Maximum PC , showing Norton as a changed animal, and also raising its reputation for efficiency.

 

[krazynutz]

Since I posted that on 4/4, I just read the reviews in Maximum PC , showing Norton as a changed animal, and also raising its reputation for efficiency.

Yeah, Norton 360 v3 (later builds) and v4 along with NAV/NIS 2009 & 2010 are totally revamped. Good stuff now.