AV-Comparative Performance Test of Anti-Virus Software May 2013

dont agree with the results at all honestly...

 

don't know about others but i can confirm that excluding boot time & shutdown time(which was also not part of this test) KIS2013 runs very light on my single core intel atom 1.8GHz desktop with 2gb ram & win 7 ultimate 32bit.in fact the only slowdown i notice is during loading of streaming videos & even then it is more an issue of ram than kaspersky & i am pretty sure that with 4gb ram impact will be even smaller.

 

Web browsing speed test with and without AV would be very interesting. There are major differences in slowdowns.

 

I have exact same observation

 

Interesting

 

Of course it is not just the security programs which can affect boot up and shutdown times.

 

Accurate assessment. Kaspersky DOES make the startup longer because it takes a while to load. Maybe not the part that says "starting Windows", but after the desktop shows up...

 

Kaspersky is extreme fast here , but I fell some slowdown with the Web Antivirus module. Is it really necessary to run this module ?

 

IMO the web modules/protection in all AV's/AM is possibly the most important layer. So I would say Yes.

 

Agree.
It will protect you even before the infected sample is downloaded.

 

I thought that the most important layer was the File AV module , with Google Chrome and Ad Muncher I am not afraid of exploits or Drive-by downloads.

But I will keep Web antivirus ON , maybe I get used ...

 

I've tried them all and every one slows my pc down. Down graded to Eset Nod32 v4 recently. Now that's fast! No slowdown at all. Just shows how bad these latest AV's are for sucking the life from your PC. IMHO the programmers have become lazy and just make sure they work well on the latest all singing all dancing pc's, whereas previously they used to ensure they ran on anything from older to newer pc's.

Paul

 

Yes, on execution is what counts.
If malware can download and is not stopped before execution - who cares? What counts: Known malware is stopped. No need for permanent traffic scanning and slowdowns with same signatures. (same for on-access AVs)

Another thing is of cause if some vendors include some kind of exploit protection in their webguards - but mostly this type of protection is in other modules.

 

Nice, thanks for the update!

 

Yes I too have found Kingsoft to be very light indeed, and from the very limited testing of Qihoo 360 I can say the same for it too.

 

Interesting results.

 

Would love to see that.

 

I 'may' be getting a new Laptop soon. I will consider giving Bitdefender a try on the new Laptop.

The new Laptop will mostly likely have: Intel Core i5, 4 GB RAM, Windows 7 Pro 64 bit.

 

I'm having one with these specs,only with Win 8 64 bit and Bitdefender (AV and IS) were pretty heavy on it.
That was in January though.Maybe something has changed lately.