AV-Comparatives release new performance test.

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by JasSolo, Nov 20, 2008.

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

    JasSolo Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Posts:
    414
    Location:
    Denmark
    Hi all, well the header says it all. Head over there and read the article :)


    Cheers
     
  2. GES/POR

    GES/POR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,490
    Location:
    Armacham
    TY for the headsup! :thumb:
     
  3. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    hmm,

    if a product slows my machine down by 40%, i would not label this has fast.

    IBK, have you lost your mind? :D *joke*
     
  4. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    wow some suprising and some i firgured as much
     
  5. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,741
    Location:
    New York City
    Nice to see Symantec doing well.
     
  6. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    yeah i was def happy to see them come as far as they have. i was a die hard norton hater myself and im actually running it for now..its really a great setup.
     
  7. ugly

    ugly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Posts:
    276
    Location:
    Romania
    Kaspersky is fast on this test and on my PC.
    I never had that huge difference in boot time between Avira,Eset or Kaspersky.o_O (f-secure faster then kaspersky o_O - not in my experience).
     
  8. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    avast! just proved again that their engine is indeed fast.
    If ALWIL guys prove again with November's proactive test they'll really show off what they really have under the hood mwahahah (nnot that i don't know that already but i like to see it written on professional webpage).
     
  9. dawgg

    dawgg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Posts:
    817
    Nice one, lots of people requested it, its finally here :)

    Test 1 and 2 most important to me
    Test 3 little importance to me (... video/music encoding software need not be scanned so should be added to exclusions to speed up the process and free up an unnecessary waste of resources IMO). Guess this test also inadvertently indicates how well tuned the engine may be and impact scenarios other than encoding, but we dont know to what extent.
    Test 4 a little important to me (as mentioned in the report, I only boot up once or twice a day)

    Surprised about Gdata being relatively decent and F-Secure being so slow.

    Doubt most people here read the report and just look at the graph, so I'll fill you in - footnote 17 says F-Secure's updated scanner (which will be released in early 2009) would be rated "Very Fast" with an overhead of +34%.
    Eyes wide open with this one, would be interesting to see the results when the updated scanner is actually released. I always take stats about unreleased products (developing/testing stages) with a rather large pinch of salt.
     
  10. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    hmm im surprised avira that high on some of the charts, but it still did decent overall. and last time i tried Eset AV it didnt seem that light to me, in my opinion it wasnt as light as kav or avira.
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2008
  11. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    Ya thanks for the heads up :)
     
  12. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,559
    No Comodo? Ugh.
     
  13. vijayind

    vijayind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Posts:
    1,413
    Guess, the "Slow as molassis" tag given to F-Secure by someone in this forum is befitting ....

    Hmm... My old junked HP PC with 512 MB RAM is overloaded with crap. Maybe I'll shift to ESET Smart Security on it. If IBK tests are right, I'll see a BIG performance jump.

    *thinking*
     
  14. noway

    noway Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Posts:
    351
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 21, 2008
  15. s4u

    s4u Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    Posts:
    441
    Noway, you are not allowed to post that this way. please change the url
     
  16. icr

    icr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Posts:
    1,588
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Good To See Norton labeled Advanced+:p
     
  17. i_g

    i_g Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Posts:
    133
    I am not saying you won't, but keep on mind that the results on a machine that different (compared to the ones the test was performed on) might be significantly different as well.
     
  18. mata7

    mata7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Posts:
    635
    Location:
    Mississauga, Canada
    i use avira on high settings and i don't notice any slow down, i don't use webguard
     
  19. Niels

    Niels Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Posts:
    466
    Location:
    Belgium
    It would have been better that the products were also tested on "older" systems that only have 512 MB and a less powerful processor. Or shouldn't that make any difference compared with the test systems that were used? I know that it's a first test. My computer has only 512 MB ram that is why I wanted to see that tested in a future test.
     
  20. vijayind

    vijayind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Posts:
    1,413
    :D , I did ...
    But I must say ESET Smart Security, does feel lighter than KIS2009. The difference is not HUGE, but it does bootup and feel lighter.
     
  21. dawgg

    dawgg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Posts:
    817
    Or you can upgrade your RAM... no point testing older setups... as time goes on, users PCs get better - so should test PCs alongside this.

    Anyway, the ranking of AVs will remain similar regardless of RAM.
     
  22. i_g

    i_g Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Posts:
    133
    Why do you think that?
    Some of the antiviruses may use quite a lot of memory (either constantly, or only during scanning... doesn't really matter); on a system with a lot of free memory, you won't notice - but a weaker system may start swapping and many operations will suddently grow terribly slower.
     
  23. emperordarius

    emperordarius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Who cares
    Good results for G-DATA, I'm surprised. Bad for Trustport, considering it was using only two engines.

    btw: When will the November(or better, December) detection test be available?
     
  24. icr

    icr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Posts:
    1,588
    Location:
    Mumbai
    They have said it will b avail in beginning of 2009;)
     
  25. demoneye

    demoneye Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Posts:
    1,356
    Location:
    ISRHell
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.