Full Article: https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/performance-test-october-2020/ Chart: https://www.av-comparatives.org/comparison/?usertype=consumer&chart_chart=chart4&chart_year=2020&chart_month=10&chart_sort=1&chart_zoom=0
Despite the fact that I am currently running Microsoft Defender, I am certainly going to make no false claims of how "light" it is.
MS Defender seems the slowest in 'file copying' and 'archiving and unarchiving', I honestly have not perceived this drop in speed on my machine. 'Launching applications', 'downloading files' and 'browsing websites, they are all operations that are carried out without any impact and again having had KIS and Avira Pro on this very machine in the last 8 months, I couldn't visually feel any difference in speed among them. Benchmarks are benchmarks, I don't dispute the results, Defender is fast enough on my machine and I believe performance in the future can only hopefully improve.
Same experience here. Defender may not work very well in so called "real life tests", which are in fact synthetic, but works well in real world. I haven't seen infected machines in a while, running WD, but had a lot customers machines, that were unusable, after Windows update. Common: Security from Avira, Avast, , AVG, ESET, Norton, McAfee, and so on... No issues with KAV, minor issues with KIS.
Straight from the horse's mouth, evidence that MS Defender just works. Thanks Hiltihome for reporting here.
I don't feel its there, super light, they have improved BIG time since last 2 years in terms of performance. I don't know what they did but jumping from being in the mid range of the performance charts to no. 1 means they did some radical changes to their scanning engine. I chose the Anti-Virus only, I don't like internet Suites
Right now, using quick heal and thinking to give a trial to F-SecureTotal version. They don't have a single-user license.
These results seem fairly normal for WD but I am surprised at the score Norton received this time. I'm used to seeing high False Positives in the AV tests but with high impact score, annoying pop ups pushing other products and browser extensions, it does not bode well for them.
WD is working the best on four of my high end computers with no perceptible slowdowns in any context. The same cannot be said for several of the eleven others I have used for the past seven months.
I don't notice slowdowns from WD, with one possible exception that I am not sure if it is WD or Windows in general. Often when I go to copy a file from my desktop to a folder, as I go to drag/drop it, things freeze for a couple seconds. File size doesn't matter, it happens even with the smallest text files. I have not done any testing to figure out if this is a Windows problem, or a WD issue.
This has been the issue from the beginning. Folks claim Defender is light because they don't know Defender slowdown from Windows slowdown. They claim these tests are invalid while producing no others to validate their opinion (not picking on anyone particular here, this quote just does a good job of pointing out the general perception). I'm not saying Defender is a bad product, there are flaws with all of them. Again, I'm using it now. I am undecided if that will continue long term. The slowdown varies per machine, and what is acceptable is different for everyone. I consider this test to be reasonably accurate, unless someone can provide evidence otherwise.
It might be WD causing it. I usually encounter this kind of slowness when managing other peoples system and have to copy data to either external HDD or network drive. Disabling WD usually decreases copying time significantly. So I usually just disable it to speed this process as I don't think it's ethical to charge people extra time because they use slow AV Make some tests and you will see if it's WD that causes that freezing.
Ok that's even stranger because as far as AV-Comparatives Performance tests go, Bitdefender is comparable to Avira in terms of performance but now they are leading the pack! But thanks for letting me this internal change I never knew they used a different scanning engine I thought they had their own. Same here, Windows Defender is the heaviest AV I've seen, on m y super fast laptop that you see in my system or others' I can immediately tell if WD is on or disabled, there's a huge system lag and delay in any operation be it browsing files in explorer, installing, or running programs.
Other AV testing lab, other results: https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/ WD: https://www.av-test.org/en/antiviru...020/microsoft-defender-antivirus-4.18-203118/ I'm definitively missing one important category: Bricked systems, after Windows update/upgrade.
AV-Comparatives list of Consumer AV Vendors shows which "Third Party Engine" (if any) is used by each product listed. https://www.av-comparatives.org/list-of-consumer-av-vendors-pc/
I just installed F-secure AV only on my main computer and I must say it is superfast opening files, saving files, opening websites, etc. In fact, I am shocked at the clear difference from the others I have tested. Not pitching F-secure, but it has made a difference in my work. I have not installed it yet on five other top-end rigs I have, so the jury is still out.
Well maybe because F-Secure IS NOT Avira? F-Secure is using Avira engine along with its in-house proprietary engines (yes, it is more than one), with their own cloud, interface, scan/disinfection algorithms and its famous pioneer behavior blocker (Deepguard). F-Secure is one of the few security players using third party engines that actually have security know-how, that actually does properly malware hunting and R&D, it is a solid and trustable company with many years of experience of fighting malware and cybercriminals. Btw DeepGuard is incredibly powerful: https://blog-assets.f-secure.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/15163346/F-Secure_DeepGuard.pdf
I installed F-Secure Safe. So far, speed is good and light too. But having limited options. the interface is so simple. but cost-wise, it is very costly to compare to other AVs. Task Bar icon, right-click has no option for a scan too. Even they don't have a single user plan too. Will try it for a few more days.
yep, you speak the truth. too many folks here and elsewhere seem to equate the use of an SDK as "copying" the products of the company who makes the SDK. it's silly and reductive.
One can probably try free version of benchmark programs like NovaBench to do quick tests for performance impact.
