AV-Comparatives: Performance Test - May 2017

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by anon, Jun 14, 2017.

  1. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    7,970
  2. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,881
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    Nice results for Eset :thumb:
     
  3. gery

    gery Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Posts:
    2,175
    what is wrong with Emsisoft?
     
  4. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    6,552
    Location:
    New York City
    Nothing that I can see. It scored Advanced + in performance.
     
  5. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    8,616
    Location:
    USA
    ...waiting for someone to make excuses for Microsoft's score. :D
     
  6. gery

    gery Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Posts:
    2,175
    my bad it is not the performance test i wanted to comment but the other test
     
  7. Spartan

    Spartan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    1,424
    Location:
    Dubai
    yet every user that uses WD loves to go on forums and say how light it is :D all I say is "keep tellin' yourself that!"
     
  8. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,787
    Norton and McAfee. My how times have changed.
     
  9. entropism

    entropism Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Posts:
    500
    Yeah, but look at McAfee's real world protection score. Things haven't changed TOO much...
     
  10. roger_m

    roger_m Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2009
    Posts:
    8,627
    Panda scored badly for browsing websites. I presume this would be due to Safe Browsing being enabled, and it would have scored better if it was disabled. I have it disabled.
     
  11. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    5,614
    Location:
    Milan and Seoul
    This is the main reason I'm not using it yet, Avira is faster than Microsoft on my win 10 machines, but the difference is acceptable considering that MS is free. Furthermore there are several reports from Chrome and Mozilla engineers stating that Windows Defender is the only AV that doesn't break Chrome and Firefox own security mechanisms.
     
  12. ReverseGear

    ReverseGear Guest

    Avira is free too.
     
  13. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    5,614
    Location:
    Milan and Seoul
    I have the pro version of Avira, but if WD keeps improving its detection capabilities, free for free I'd go with WD as it is integrated with Windows and plays well with Chrome.
     
  14. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    8,616
    Location:
    USA
    Windows Defender would be my first choice as far as free. It will have to catch up on the performance and protection before I replace paid products with it. They may get there some day. I hope they do.
     
  15. ArchiveX

    ArchiveX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2014
    Posts:
    1,500
    Location:
    .
    Yeap! :thumb:
     
  16. guest

    guest Guest

    Disable the https scan
    WD can't break anything because it doesn't have
     
  17. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    5,614
    Location:
    Milan and Seoul
    I have disabled Avira's Web Protection on two machines, as I always browse with Sandboxie there is no need to have it on...
     
  18. ance

    ance formerly: fmon

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    1,360
    No safe browsing in free version, no performance problems. :thumb:
     
  19. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,251
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    They are still unreliable, and the recent malware protection test proved the new McAfee "LAM" engine is actually inferior to the old one. I've had many computers infected with McAfee because they couldn't get cloud access.

    The same is with Norton, I don't even know if human malware analysts work there anymore.

    I wouldn't recommend anyone to install these two products.

    P. S. Why isn't BullGuard on this test?
     
  20. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    7,970
  21. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,251
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
  22. Spartan

    Spartan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    1,424
    Location:
    Dubai
    So when they say Symantec in these tests, they mean Norton Security?
     
  23. entropism

    entropism Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Posts:
    500
    Symantec Norton Security 22.9, yes.
     
  24. Nevi

    Nevi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Posts:
    29
    Location:
    Copenhagen
    I´m not surpriced over Emsisofts great result. But Panda should be such a light application?
     
  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.