AV-C Performance test June

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by BoerenkoolMetWorst, Jun 20, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Nevis

    Nevis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Posts:
    812
    Location:
    255.255.255.255
    Kaspersky is heavy. I have been using it for a month. when I boot, it feels heavy.
    eg: if I click chrome, it takes more time to start. On booting, the apps start late when I click them or even start menu. Note that I am using a powerful processor.
    After sometime, it feels fine.

    Inspite of that I like it and have not uninstalled it :) , thats the power of great detection it got.
     
  2. ReverseGear

    ReverseGear Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Posts:
    1,549
    Location:
    Mumbai
    I havent noticed any performance lag while using kaspersky for more than 2 months
    And i havent tweaked any settings in the shields to improve its performance
     
  3. Amin

    Amin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Posts:
    437
    Location:
    UK
    the first one sir !

    it's not a kidding when Symantec and Comodo are not participating in these tests any more, something behind the curtains of AV-C and im sure about it.
    it's like a direct relationship between kaspersky and av-c companies. otherwise as i said kaspersky would have fallen down the bottom.

    fine you say u got no problem with kaspersky performance in your computer,

    a big but here...

    its making me pretty mad when they say kaspersky is lighter than bullguard , it's more like a joke.;)

    btw if the 2013 version of bitdefedner was tested im sure the result would be changed a lot.
     
  4. Rampastein

    Rampastein Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Posts:
    290
    Symantec didn't want to participate in detection (on-demand) tests where they didn't do so well, and AV-C requires participation in all tests for their results to get published at all. As for Comodo, there was quite a bit of drama involved in their AV-C participation some time ago that I don't want to start spreading. You'll find it if you want to.

    I find KIS heavy initially after installation, but after doing a single Full Scan and running all my programs a few times (so it doesn't scan them anymore since they've been scanned already) I don't find it slowing down much. It's also projected in the results; it's quick on subsequent runs (in the File Copying and Open Word tests).

    That's your opinion. The results are pretty much what I expected, Kaspersky isn't one of the lightest, nor one of the heaviest suites.

    Overally it's good to see (from both the results and real-life experience) that AVs generally aren't slowing down systems a lot anymore.
     
  5. Tomwa

    Tomwa Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Posts:
    165
    Using the latest KIS 2012 here and I have to say it runs great for me (When it doesn't go spontaneously stupid) and I wouldn't trade KIS2012 for anything else (We'll see how I feel about KIS2013).
     
  6. malexous

    malexous Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    Ireland
    Yet Kaspersky is ranked 5/18 (Anti-Virus) and 6/15 (Internet Security) in a report funded by Symantec Corporation: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=322835.
     
  7. Amin

    Amin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Posts:
    437
    Location:
    UK
    come on !! i know about av-c tests conditions And symantec knew too!! after hearing this , it's not like Symantec was suddenly shocked " oh my god i didn't know i have to participate all the tests " . maybe it was a policy not to keep on with av-c.. as Melih directly said. but Symantec is a respectable and beloved company and has its own policies

    and i know about Melih too

    http://www.melih.com/2011/11/27/av-...-and-financial-deals-with-anti-virus-vendors/

    and i don't know why some people just say Melih is a liar. just have a look at what Peter Stelzhammer said in those emails. made me lol !!

    i know that kaspersky have an option which does you a great favor and doesn't scan the fixed files when on access . in 2013 version they finally found out yes our product was so heavy durin these times and they figured out that they have to remove some modules like Proactive deffence and safe run , maybe they could make it a little faster. and AFAIK u can not limite the programs which have digital sign and it's too bad when encountering malwares with digital sign like Zeus merrier to say ZBOT that steals digital signs



    can you name of some antiviruses you think they are "Heavy" , may this help me finally find out what you call "Heavy".

    of course i admit kaspersky is powerful i don't deny it. but..


    i say ( for 2012 version and lower) so many modules are put in kaspersky which actually its kinda overacting and we do not need some of them at all , for example Proactive and bb and heursitic analyze and hips and safe run and application control and .. and ..


    best regards
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2012
  8. 3x0gR13N

    3x0gR13N Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Posts:
    792
    You're missing the point. By removing PDM they're not saying the program was heavy, just that it can be made faster- like any program out there. There's a big difference between "heavy" and "can be made faster". WSA can also be made faster, while being the lightest (according to AVC).
    The above is equivalent to saying that suites with many processes are heavy by default- which is of course false. Number of protection modules doesn't necessarily mean a heavier program.

    And I fail to see how anyone can make objective assessments of how heavy/light a program is based on isolated situations (like your system) or test cases (AVC). Use what works best for you and don't project your findings onto others' systems.
     
  9. Amin

    Amin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Posts:
    437
    Location:
    UK
    you're right.. but no matter " heavy " , " can be made faster " let em say whatever they want , not we nor them can fool ourself by playin with words!!
    the truth is obvious

    firstly, i didn't say that "so many modules would make a program heavy."
    secondly havin so many modules is necessary but not adequate condition to make heavier.
    also i said kaspersky is heavy which is obvious for me and then i pointed these so many security modules. not the vice versa.. every sane person knows reducin or optimizing the amount of modules for avs which are heavy would help it be lighter..


    im totally agree with this part n you are right. people have got various desires and we can not convict them to do what they are not tendin to.
    all these were my own viewpoints of course , but since i am a user and every company including kaspersky should notice the users feedbacks which is the first basic sign of respection

    Best regards:thumb:
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2012
  10. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,156
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    The fact that PC Tools remains in the AV-C test proves that Symantec is still interested in seeing how their engine does at AV-Comparatives. More likely Norton was pulled out for business and marketing reasons.
     
  11. toxinon12345

    toxinon12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Posts:
    1,200
    Location:
    Managua, Nicaragua
    good point, as both products share the same definitions, so the OD detection is the same
     
  12. PeZzy

    PeZzy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2011
    Posts:
    56
    It's funny that Vipre is the "Virus Prevention That Won’t Slow You Down", yet it's near the bottom in the performance test.
     
  13. PeZzy

    PeZzy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2011
    Posts:
    56
    I personally haven't used Kapersky, but many antivirus have the option to turn off the boot scan.
     
  14. malexous

    malexous Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    Ireland
    August 2011:
    PC Tools: 88.4%
    Symantec: 95.1%.

    Although, Symantec heuristics were set to Aggressive and PC Tools heuristics were set to whatever is default.
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2012
  15. Technical

    Technical Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Posts:
    471
    Location:
    Brazil
    Congratulations Webroot and avast! :cool:
     
  16. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,058
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I agree. I have been using Webroot for a while on two new computers- and I cannot perceive any impact at all.
     
  17. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,156
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    This result is because of different heuristics and cloud networks. The signature detection is exactly the same. The result improved for PC Tools in later tests because lately they have been incorporating several detections from Norton's cloud into their own.
    As time goes on they will be closer to each other (you can already see they are pretty close in AV-Test). They differentiate the products by not having Norton Insight and hourly updates in PC Tools (it updates once or twice a day only).

    (Also PC Tools sometimes add their own signatures as well)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.