AV-Comparatives: Performance-Test (Suites) October 2014 http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/avc_per_201410_en.pdf Enjoy and regards.
I'm calling this fishy!! Symantec wasn't even tested, yet it shows up in one of the charts like they clip and pasted it from an old test.. Also Norton 2015 is exceptionally lightweight, so we know that wasn't where it was. Yet Norton disappears from the other charts!
and how come ESET appears as the lest impact in performance? It's the heaviest of them all.....doesn't make sense..... when I say heaviest, this is on my super fast Alienware 18 laptop with SSDs, 32 GB of RAM, and a 4810MQ i7 running @ 3.8 GHz
My experience with ESET is also that it is quite heavy. Some other performance tests from other firms show Eset as being pretty heavy. The clip and past action, leaving symantec in, leads me to believe this whole thing is a sham, or at least suspect. Probably too early to make that claim, but at the very least it's sloppy and should cause some concern. If they are interested in fairness, and accuracy, why leave a product in they haven't even tested?!?!
i have always found eset to be crazy light until recently v7 / v8 wish it wasnt so because i do love eset as a whole.
Luckily not everyone has that experience. Don't you want to get it sorted or just write about it all the time? You know ESET won't bite your finger off if you tell them about your experience. You can use your "maximus" account on the ESET forum to let them know.
But you said...."It's the heaviest of them all" For me Heavy = impact on system performance/makes the PC sluggish/general slow down while browsing etc etc... Do you have problems like that or are you referring to your streaming problems when you say that it's heavy? "no solid help given" We are not done yet, we're in the troubleshooting process to pinpoint it down. We have to test out stuff to try to find the cause for it. Continue to follow what Marcos says. And report back to Marcos how it went with Firefox in naked mode.
i myself said i found eset heavier lately i would for sure not say its the heaviest out there though far from it. the only two areas i find it heavy are anything video playback wise and it killed my upload speeds for some reason even with the web filter disabled i have turn off the whole thing to see normal speeds.
In the November 2013 test, Norton Internet Security is fifth from the bottom in the PC Mark 8 section yet gets an AV-C Score of 90. In 2015 Consumer Security Products Performance Benchmarks (Edition 1) Norton Security places 6/9 in the PC Mark section.
AV-Comparatives' fearless leader has a thing against Norton ever since Norton decided to pull out of the static scan tests. I think NS 15 is really light, and that's saying a lot considering that 14 was really light. The UI is much faster, scanning is faster.
It's a mistake, nothing more. You must distinguish between testet and published. There are some vendors which let test but not publish their results, there are some external sponsors (f.e. pc-magazines) who let test products for separate publications. Second for example was often so for Symantec - others paid to see how they perform, so they were testet but nor listet in official report.
Maybe you'll never know, cause Symantec won't have results released. So why care about them? But the benchmarks (yes we can critizise some of them) AV-C used are clearly listed in report. So this test can be re-done by other persons who want to compare Symantec.
I don't get it Bitdefender performance is horrible on my system, but Comodo, AVG, Avast, and Norton run without issues. Comodo IS runs the lightest of them all. I don't trust these performance test, because everyone's system is different.
