Webroot winner in AV Comparative Summary Report 2012!!!!

Overall performance (Low-System-Impact) winners:

WEBROOT


http://www.av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews/summary-reports/253-summary-report-december-2012

 

I don't think the full report on Webroot's performance in these tests warrants a (positive) mention like this! System performance is almost a non-issue with PCs these days.

It's obviously a difficult product to assess but, if I was a potential customer, I'm not sure I'd put Webroot top of my shortlist.

 

In the larger scope of awards and importance, the pitiful shame is this equates to one of those, "Thank you coming this year," awards.

 

Agree 100%

I've been giving Webroot a go over the past month and found no noticable differences in system performance between it and Kaspersky Internet Security 2013 on my Quad-Core desktop (Win 7 x64).

 

For the last time? Take a look at page 179.

 

The end of the PDF explains what we're going to be doing moving forward. These results have been expected from our end as it has been difficult to test WSA, as I'm sure everyone here knows. I'm meeting with them next week in Austria to start figuring out how to make statistically significant and accurate tests of WSA.

 

Success in finding a test so that it can be used to compare with other products.

 

Will you not be entering the Real world protection tests anymore? WSA was doing pretty good if you count the user-dependent cases, and I thought these were going to be automatized.

 

Great! And good luck Joe

 

Using the same or similar PC config (8 & 16 GIG DDR3 RAM) & Beta testing 'Kaspersky Internet Security' from RC1 to final I found a great difference in performance & few PC's are setup with the same care as mine. I also was an official Beta tester of 'NIS' (2013) & found similar performance differences which were very noticeable.

 

Page 179 really says it all, a recognition that a different system needs to be use to test as a different system is used to run the AV - Seems pretty logical to me?

 

Well done! I am not surprised

 

I wish you the very best of luck PrevxHelp and to the guys on av-c, in your common efforts to find a way and solutions in this matter.

 

Problem is, this product works for me in all the tests I run. Now I am not a expert but I have yet to understand those who say its protection is crap. It isn't, and that is why it stays in my stables.

 

I actually missed any talk about this. Are there any threads that someone can point me to? (I'm not doubting it at all; I'm just curious about the details.)

 

Search for AV-C and the Official announcement here: http://community.webroot.com/t5/Sec...om-AV-Comparatives-and-Webroot/m-p/17708#M648 also you can look at this video http://community.webroot.com/t5/Webroot-Education/If-Webroot-quot-Misses-quot-a-Virus/ta-p/10202

HTH,

TH

 

LOL.. System performance is crucial, and there are many apps to prove some products are simply -- heavy.. Kaspersky for example added 3-4 times the length of time to launch any application. Some products add so much DPC overhead they kill browsing speed.

Folks saying any different are in denial, seriously. We have methods to measure this stuff, and frankly, some products are unusable they are so heavy these days. That's on fast machines, faster than yours...

 

I agree completely. I have an ultra-fast Windows 7 computer with Core i7 and huge memory and I tested Avira AV against Webroot and there is no comparison. Opening programs and browsing speed was much slower with Avira- no question.

 

Webroot is probably the fastest AV on the market right now;

According to AV test , Webroot has a 0 sec impact on computer performance, while the industry standard is 5 sec and Avira has 8sec.

http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/novdec-2012/

On the other hand, Webroot landed in "Low-System-Impact" awards and nothing else , while Avira got "Top Rated".

If you want a fast product with low impact and questionable performance, you got it.

If you want a proven /tested solution, you have to compromise.

topor

 

Until recently I had a slow dual core AMD and know it's performance with Avira Internet Security only, combined with Webroot SecureAnywhere (WSA) and with WSA only - all Win7 on SSD.

It made such a big difference (subjective "feeling" of my system) that I now don't even think with my new quad core AMD (much faster than the old CPU of course) to add another av-solution again just because I "could".

Simply because I do hate it if I lose something (even miniscule) in the most important category (which is: my system being most snappy and not being dragged down at all!) for something that does not find any malware anyway because there simply isn't. (Years of frustrating scanning experience! )

So Webroot isn't in any danger to get uninstalled / not prolonged if the competition can't invent something that is even lighter than Webroot. And I doubt very much they can. - Yes, often people on this forum claim they don't see the drag with other products and think it's roughly the same compared to Webroot, but then in independent "official" tests it consistently doesn't look so good anymore.

So for me one thing stays the same and it simply doesn't matter if I have a fast i7 or a slow atom CPU running, because it's a matter of principle: my av-solution should take as less power "away" (speed and energy) from my system as possible. - Being malware-free for years (false positives aside) makes me feel like this.

I wouldn't feel comfortable without any AV-solution (using Windows), but I also wouldn't like to use the program with (so called) 100% detection if at the same time it makes things even a little bit slower than they have to be.

A perfect antivirus software (perfect for ME!) has to stay away from my computer resources (I didn't buy them to run an antivirus!) and must not bother me in any other way, just being there for the unlikely case something COULD happen (but never does - so far).

There is always room for improvement (fp topic for example), sure, but at this moment and for a very long time WSA is just the thing for MY needs. - YMMV of course.

"Dragging bloatware" (in my opinion compared to WSA pretty much all av-software is ) won't have a chance being installed by me (or live longer than a few minutes while being tested), may the laboratory test results regarding detection be as good as they can get. No chance, sorry.

Yes, if WSA one day should let through something that destroys my system I probably will reconsider my take on this, but not before that.

Congratulations to Prevx / Webroot for taking the drag away!

 

First of all this is not meant to be a vs b i want ti simply explain a CUSTOMER experience with this post:

i had a client in yesterday with a 6 year old laptop who insisted they wanted to fix it instead of replace it .... okay no problem (with the lower end 350$ laptops though its beyond me why) so they replaced the hard drive add ram we replaced the keyboard that was missing keys. then it came time for the av previously they ran with no av at all. we showed them our offerings as we offer many different ones, explaining each but they one they "knew" was norton so their av of choice was norton. so we went ahead and installed it. they returned the today and remember the newest norton is by no means a heavyweight they had 2013 installed which i feel is heavier then 2012 was but that's maybe just me. they wondered why things were taking so long like boot up and browsing etc and again i say nortons has very little impact nowadays but it is still there.

i had to explain to them you have a 6+ year old laptop with 2gb of ram and while it will be fine for most things it will show some slowdown compared to todays laptops even a newer celeron. their friend had bought a 300$ budget laptop from wal mart and they were comparing it to that.

i offered them to remove norton as it was still in the trial period and install wsa to see what they thought. they literally just called me and said "WOW, what did you do its so much faster doing everything now" those were their exact words. i explained we did nothing except switch the av out from norton to wsa. they were sold period and are on their way in now for me to install the key for them and help set up their wsa online account.

i agree that wsa may not have the absolute best detection but so far for my clients its working very well and i have had nothing but compliments on it up till this point. and this is our go to for these types of clients especially being it has literally no system impact. just wanted to share that experience and that is coming from a clients direct experience from a system we repaired yesterday.

 

Lol . System performance ? The poor guy with the ultra-fast Windows 7 computer with Core i7 and huge memory needs a new computer . If that computer is anywhere close to what he claims , the performance of the machine should run the same through a tornado ! In this day , performance of an AV is pretty much a non issue with the exception of OLD machines . If an Antiviruses performance slows your computer down so much that it is bothersome , I would look at getting a new computer . Some cannot afford that but , I think there is a small minority that actually cares about the performance of an AV on their system . This is almost as bad as complaining about the looks of an AV . And since everyone is different , try different Antivirus software to find one that works right for you . Choosing based on performance in a test is just nuts anyway .

 

You should have informed your client about privacy issues when using a cloud AV, as well as the necessity to be connected to the internet 100% of the time when using a cloud AV without a resident database; you may be surprised to see his/her enthusiasm disappearing....

topor

 

First of all, just because I am really curious about that:

WHY are you using always strange colors? And even more annoying: why are you always pressing your space bar before punctuation marks where it doesn't belong? - Or is this how it is done in Disneyland?

Never mind, now to the main point:

Maybe in your fantasy world of cartoon characters? - Performance of AV (different as it is with different products) is clearly important to MANY (!) people here (and not less to those with fast machines as you can see!) and for sure you are not the one finally deciding about that issue with some kind of a verdict, or are you?

Maybe performance and the differences are not so important to YOU, but that's okay of course, not everyone has to be a speed junkie.

Well, that sounds pretty moronic advise to me if one instead can just change the av solution to get happy?

If they never saw their system with a fast AV instead of slow bloatware you might be right! Such people tend to take the drag as a natural thing, are accustomed to that and probably honestly believe (those poor souls) they should buy a new computer if they are one day bothered by that. - You seem to be from that group of uninformed people that economy loves so much.

Intelligent people search for the cause of the drag and try to eliminate that by simply uninstalling crap software.

What's wrong with saying that for example Bitdefender looks (to me!) like designed by a 14 year old gamer? And that if I have a choice (and thank god I do!) I would prefer a clean, professional GUI that is easy on the eyes while configuring that software?

Nothing to complain about that plat.. sentence. But once in a while you should take that to heart (that we all are different!) and realize that people have different opinions from yours. And some might even have argumentation for theirs.

I am very different from you and to me - as I said - performance matters the MOST (I am not kidding, I mean it!) and I wouldn't buy a new computer if I can have nearly the same effect when using a fast AV.

My system is fast enough for anything I do. (32-bit < 4 GB RAM, never needed more!). Why should I buy a new computer? - I just don't like bloatware of any kind dragging my system down. And I haven't a very high tolerance, I give you that. The slightest drag, something you wouldn't probably even feel, is already annoying me. You cannot understand this, I see. But I like it fast and love to optimize MY existing system (not buying a new one since a) I am not Croesus and b) that wouldn't be as rewarding as "tuning" what you have to the "optimal" performance).

Well, at least this is your OPINION, we can agree about that. - I for example think it's to not know where space bar should be used and where not. But to each his own.

And also I did not choose WSA because of that test (I used Prevx for years!) and told you already that I NEVER have malware on my system (in fact I had when I installed Prevx, but I say "since then!"). So I (!) can afford choosing the lightest AV software available (why shouldn't I?) and not thinking about other criteria.

I also didn't say that other people (like you!) shouldn't care about detection etc. and just go for performance, especially if they do things that are often dangerous (cracks etc.) or don't have a clue ... of course in those cases you probably should choose something that scores 100 % at those tests to be on the "safe" side! (Or just believe that).

No, I only said and meant: I don't care about all that and I am fine so far with MY strategy: choosing performance over detection/protection results. It's just my opinion and my experience and what I (!) prefer.

We are all different (or so it seems to be) and thanks btw. for YOUR opinion. - You just read MINE and have to live with that, I guess.

@ topor:

Yes, anyone advising cloud solutions should mention that. In this case especially when making a Webroot account (which is optional last time I checked). - Because it's different from the old way and has it's privacy concerns, sure. - But your other point isn't really one I guess, at least not to me: all people that I know are permanently online these days (and the last years!), I literally don't know anyone (!) that is still on dialup. If one is and using USB-Sticks etc, you are right ... cloud solutions might have their special problems.

 

Speed vs Effectiveness...
AV-C themselves said that they don't have a good way to test Webroot properly. If I see a test say something is not working as well, but then the testers say the test is not really valid... I take real life evidence over the admitted-invalid test.

I'm constantly astounded by the number of people who live in their little fantasy world of test results and think that's the real world. All you need to do to know it's not the real world is work on hundreds of systems a week and see what gets broken or bypassed.

I use it because it's fast. I use it because even before AV-C said the test wasn't effective for testing it, I didn't believe the results when my own eyes told me differently. I have a brain and I have an easy time seeing what reality is. Every single person I've explained it to has no issues with the exception of some of the trolls here. I'm sure the trolls are perfectly capable of understanding but just don't want to. *shrug* That's a troll for you.