AV-Comparatives ~ Performance Test Security Suites ~ August 2011

yeah, i noticed that the test machine is another factor influencing the results. Some products use a limited set of signatures for better performance, reducing detection at the same time.
Such products doesnt keep his low system footprint when tested under single core CPUs

 

There is an error in the first statement - what I wanted to say is that some products feel light and responsive, while they are not actually so, while others feel less responsive while not being so heavy when looked at analytically (CPU usage, memory, etc.)

Indeed, that includes small things like which CPU you have and the OS, and in some rare cases, your RAM speed.

Agree with this, some products simply don't perform well on single or even low end dual core CPUs, but try it on an entry level quad core and you'll be surprised it's the same product

 

With any Antivirus or suite you have to experience it for your self and not just read into memory -cpu.I think I have tried them all and as a example,I have tried Viper that was said to be light and wont slow you down, but with my experience was the opposite, It did slow me down.


Now I am on a trial with F-Secure 2011 AV that has 9 processes runnining and yet the system remains responsive with no slow downs,go figure.


Also any Antivirus or any suite of the exact same product on different machines can run totally different,even if the specs are the same or simulair.

 

@djohn: If you read the report carefully, you must have noticed that F-Secure got the highest marks in the benchmark test.

 

yes it sure did.