AV Test December 2014 Windows 7

Yeah, I think like that everyday while reading Wilders...but it's their systems so I could care less.

 

What OS are you running that you can get away with that? XP? I won't do less than 8GB of RAM at this point. At work we have machines with 4GB, 8GB and a couple with 16GB. You can tell the difference between them pretty easily.

 

Yes of course, not worth to install any newer Win OS with that little ram, not that I have tried since it won't work. And as the ESET RAM usage is 90-120mb all the time it works fine. I keep this system around for fun.

 

I never have an excessive number of startup programs. I've tested over 50 different antiviruses and antimalware softwares over the last 8+ months since I did a clean install of Windows on my current laptop. During that time, I've never restored to a clean image or reinstalled Windows, and as far as I can tell, there are no leftover traces from previously installed security software causing any issues. I certianly do know that leftover traces can cause problems. I remember seeing a BSOD on a machine with Kaspersky installed, which caused by a leftover file from Spyware Doctor, which had been uninstalled a few years prior.

Over the course of the last few years I have found that some antiviruses can be heavy on some computers and light on others with there being no obvious reason for the difference in performance. A few years ago now, I installed the 6 month trial of Kingsoft Antivirus. This was long before the free Kingsoft AV which was a completely different product. I was slowing down my compuer a lot. One of the guys from Kingsoft had a look at my computer over the internet via TeamViewer to try and find the cause of the slowness. The end result was that he found nothing wrong with my system, it was just that Kingsoft was too heavy.

Well I don't usually do an install and uninstall at the same time, but I will often install another antivirus before doing the requested reboot after uninstalling the previous antivirus. I don't think this should cause issues, becuase any traces of the previous antivirus which were to be deleted at the next reboot will still be deleted.

Because I can . I'm not worried about problems arising as I am highly skilled at fixing Windows problems. No matter how badly I mess up my computers, 99% of the time I am able to fix any issues without having to do a clean install of Windows or restore from an image.

 

These systems should be recycled. You can't really blame products. I haven't seen a system with less than 4GB of ram in half a decade.

 

I see no one's talking about "mediocre, bloatware" McAfee.....

 

Of course one can blame it on a product if they are the cause for an issue or problem, but I am not blaming any product in this thread. Others are doing that.

 

I wasn't talking about that you specifically had many auto startups and/or background processes. Only that it is a common cause for slow PC's that should not be blamed on something else.

I would still have done a backup before starting that huge testing project and started using that backup after those 50+ AVs had been in and out on your system when you were done with your product testing.

That is because Kingsoft was on the heavy side, not only on your system but when I tried it a few years ago too. Glad we agree on that.

Haha yes we can all do it the wrong way if we want , but that doesn't mean I am prepared to take the chance and create a problem if doing it the right way (the way it's meant do be done) can prevent something very unnecessary from happening. And I can use the time it would take to fix any possible problem on other stuff where it's more needed.

 

With good reason, My new PC W 8.1 came with a free 1 year subscription and it went right in the recycle bin.

 

Wise decision ...

 

But that's your opinion..not everyone is the same.

 

I WANT to see McAfee improve, but some missteps (even lately) are... Unacceptable..

1) McAfee actually contacted the Finfisher people to make sure McAfee wouldn't detect it.
2) McAfee 'killed' all lifetime subscriptions to PasswordBox immediately after they bought it. Despite promising to honor paying customers.

Both of these I find unacceptable, and unless they have a change in direction I don't see them regaining their market. Norton and Trend on the otherhand, seem to be keen to rebuild images, and re-launch their products.. McAfee? Business as usual.

 

According to the latest AV-test Eset is no longer very light on system resources. Anti-virus like Bitdefender, and Kaspersky that use to be much heavier on system resources are lighter than Eset now according to AV-test. Eset's Good detection with little impact on system performance has been my biggest reason for sticking with them over the years. When NOD 32 V8 came out I was having some issues with web pages loading really slow, and sometime pages would not finish loading at all. I decided to try Kaspersky which has been considerably heavier on system resources on my machines in the past. Web pages actually seemed to load much faster with Kaspersky than NOD 32 V8 during that time. I'm not sure about now. I could definitely tell a difference with web pages loading slower when upgrading from V7 to V8. I think V7 performed really well on my machines.

I looked at Eset's last performance score with V7, and it scored the same as V8. I thought V7 would have received a better performance score than V8, but strangely it received the same score that V8 did. I think NOD 32 V7 was considerably lighter on system resources on my machine than V8. Web pages seemed to load much faster with V7, but i'm not sure about how much a difference there was with application responsiveness. Its been a while now since I have used V7, but I think there was not a big difference. I upgraded to V8 because it is suppose to have improved exploit blocking, and if you use ESS it has improved firewall capability like Botnet protection, etc.. Web pages seem to load slower still since upgrading to V8, but maybe it's just slow servers that cannot handle the amount of web traffic they are getting. I think V8 has improved since it was released. If they both use the same http filter module then i'm not sure what would cause a difference in webpage loading faster with V7 than V8 unless it's the improved exploit mitigation. Maybe there is no difference now. I may go back to using V7 again which worked really well for me, and see if I can still tell a difference in surfing speed.

 

LOL!! I Guess mcafee's old reputation was so bad that when one sees it ore installed on a system that's the first thing to u install. I'm like you by the way and have 0 interest to even try it no matter what year were in or what upgrades they may have done

 

The last light NOD32 for me was v6, after that it just become heavier and heavier, don't ask why, I could feel it, loading big apps like Adobe Illustrator would take 3 seconds longer with NOD32 for example, and that's on my super fast laptop that you see in my sig.

As for loading webpages slower, it's not the server, it's the HTTP scanning it's a nightmare

 

Do you have your laptop overclocked to 4Ghz, or is that factory release?

 

Is this your processor? http://ark.intel.com/products/75131/Intel-Core-i7-4900MQ-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz

 

It was factory overclocked, the default turbo boost overclocked is 3.8 GHz for the 4900MQ CPU so that's only a 200 MHz overclock, very safe and temps are cool

 

I have an Intel Core i7 960 @ 3.20GHz Bloomfield 45nm Technology. I didn't overclock it though. It's plenty fast enough for me without overclocking it. I'm hoping it will last longer if I don't overclock it. I actually have 3 of them. I use to be a systems builder, but I have not messed with it in a while.

 

Yeah, when your running a powerful computer like that you shouldn't see much system impact unless you are running a bunch of security software together. I have Online Armor, NOD 32, and AppGuard on my desktops, and I have Eset Smart Security, and VoodooShield on my Laptop.

 

Btw.. I think V7 was lighter than V6 for me. Version 7 has been one of the lightest versions I have used. It's still not like the 2.7 days though. Version 2.7 was a gem! It's hard to get any lighter than that. I'm not sure why web pages started loading slower with V8. Maybe it was the improved exploit mitigation. I may go back to 7 soon since it worked so well for me, and see if there is any difference now.

 

@Cutting_Edgetech

Instead of going back to v7 (the same Internet Protection Module you have with v8 will be downloaded to v7 as well during the VSD updates) I would report your findings to ESET so they can take a look, and possibly fix this slow website loading, then with a bit of luck maybe mortal raptor will get his nightmare sorted at the same time.

I think it's worth noting that ESET has more or less always scored terrible on the performance part in the tests by AV-Test during the last couple of years, so no news under the sun here, these results was expected in my book.

And also worth noting that they actually came out as no1 in the performance test by AV-C:
http://www.av-comparatives.org/performance-test-suites-october-2014/

So in AV-C very good, and this one by AV-Test quite bad.

These performance tests are nothing I go by when I chose product. And I don't change product because of the results either.

 

You're just a glutton for punishment..

You are correct, nobody is talking about McAfee, as McAfee is again, as always, mediocre.

On the cumulative AV-Comparatives link I posted earlier in this thread, McAfee is in the bottom half for detection, but is #2 for false positives.

http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php

McAfee just has a lot of sucktitude.

And again... I run it on one system. I have a friend who works for McAfee. I want them to do well. But they are perpetually mediocre.

On the August AV-Test result, McAfee did great. I thought that might have been the turnaround point. But no.... I am still waiting.

 

But I did with NOD32 even on this super fast system, that just comes to confirm AV-TEST results test after test. Trust me, the moment Uninstall NOD32 the first thing that would think is wow, I just bought a new PC

 

When I was using Nod I didn't experience any slowdown but after removing it I did notice some system speedup. Now everything is instant, before I would get some small (part of a second) slowdown. It's not a big delay but it is noticeable.