Fun with NOD32

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by NOD32 user, Aug 7, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    Well, me being who I am I do like to occassionally have a bit of fun.

    Bench marking is a comparison - it requires keeping all aspects the same except for those being compared, in this case the PC's are going to be different... so just for kicks we've now got a very simple system bench-mark comparison tool using NOD32.

    Process is as follows and assumes default NOD32 install path etc.:
    1. Download the bench mark file here and save it to c:\Bench_with_NOD32.rar (236.7KB)
    2. Run the following command by any of your favourite methods, for example Start --> Run
      Code:
      "C:\Program Files\ESET\nod32.exe" "C:\Bench_with_NOD32.rar" /adware /ah /all /arch+ /heur+ /heurdeep /log+ /mailbox+ /ntfs+ /pack+ /quarantine /scanboot+ /scanmbr+ /scanmem- /scroll+ /sfx+ /unsafe
    3. Note both the 'NOD32 version' and the 'Total scanning time' from the scanning log.
    4. Repeat on different systems making sure that the 'NOD32 version' is the same and compare the scanning times
    5. Have a coffee, beer, water or what ever else your favourite beveridge is and have a nice day :)
    Some points to keep in mind:
    • Bench_with_NOD32.rar is just a special RAR archive (actually it's not so special except that it's readily compressible)
    • It is not an indication of the performance of NOD32 since a dummy file is used that is not like you would find in real life.
    • It is not suitable for comparing different AV's.
    • Memory scanning is not used since this may penalise a system with more RAM
    • This is not a definitive system comparison method, it is indicative - ultimately just a bit of fun.
    Cheers :)
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2006
  2. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    On my main workstation the results were as follows:
    • NOD32 version 1.1695 (20060807) NT
    • Total scanning time: 19 sec
     
  3. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    nice! Good work. :D I'm going to test it right now...

    EDIT: Tested:
    * NOD32 version 1.1695 (20060807) NT
    * Total scanning time: 32 sec ... a little bit too slow I may say. :(
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2006
  4. Brian N

    Brian N Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,148
    Location:
    Denmark
    Took forever to get it out of the rar file after the test ... AMON ftw :D

    • NOD32 version 1.1695 (20060807) NT
    • Total scanning time: 14 sec (00:00:14)
     
  5. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    I'm not getting it, sorry
     
  6. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    mm..I have the slowest PC and/or NOD32 here. :D
     
  7. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    To get the .rar file you need a download manager. :D :D (joking of course :p)
     
  8. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    If it is slowing down the pc, disable AH. You cannot have an excellent emulation and detection capabilities and no slow down at a time.
     
  9. Brian N

    Brian N Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,148
    Location:
    Denmark
    It's just a very simple system benchmark comparison tool using NOD32.
    So we can compare scanning time on different PC's :) All in good fun.
     
  10. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    That's right! But on Brian and NOD32 user PCs scanning time was faster than mine. Perhaps my NOD32 AHs have better emulation process. :D :D :cool:
     
  11. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    Entirely agreed - This is not an indication of the performance of NOD32 itself, and the file being scanned is deliberately giving the emulation a good workout.
    It is not a real life example of NOD32's performance, but a comparison between the PC's....
    Later I will run it on an old clunker and then we'll see :D

    Cheers :)
     
  12. iMigs

    iMigs Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Posts:
    18
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    Okay i did the benchmark to on a T2300 centrino duo notebook with 1gb ram. Seems to me NOD isn't using both cores.
     

    Attached Files:

  13. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    My first result was from a P4 3.0HT with 512MB RAM. It was definately using hyperthreading (I checked) :)

    This is for my old clunker test bed pII350 128MB RAM etc.
    • NOD32 version 1.1695 (20060807) NT
    • Total scanning time: 119 sec
    Please remember that this is definately not a measure of the real life performance of NOD32 in any way but a comparison of hardware by using NOD32.

    Cheers :)
     
  14. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    as this is to "measure the speed of the system" and has nothing really to do with nod32, i think someone should move this topic to "Sub-Forums : Software, Hardware and General Services" or similar. (just my opinion)
     
  15. NOD32 user

    NOD32 user Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    1,766
    Location:
    Australia
    What ever pleases those responsible, I'm glad of it.

    Cheers :)
     
  16. sir_carew

    sir_carew Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Posts:
    884
    Location:
    Santiago, Chile
    I ran the test :p

    Results:
    Version 1.1696 NT
    Total scanning time: 32 sec

    I'm using XP Home SP2 with 376 RAM and AMD Duron 1,1
     
  17. sir_carew

    sir_carew Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Posts:
    884
    Location:
    Santiago, Chile
    Which processor do you have?
    We've got the same time :p:ouch:

     
  18. gatorzone

    gatorzone Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    8
    Location:
    djakarta sin sity
    I got 25 seconds :(
     
  19. IcePanther

    IcePanther Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Posts:
    308
    Location:
    (nearby) Paris, France
    Version : 1.1696 NT
    Time : 27sec.

    Note : this is on my laptop with an Athlon XP-M processor, so this is hard to measure performance as it is a stepping processor and I still don't know how to put it in 'fullspeed' mode (meaning, full speed at all times, as opposed to now, where it speeds up as needed) :rolleyes:
     
  20. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    AMD Athlon 1 GHz, 768 DDR. :D
     
  21. ctrlaltdelete

    ctrlaltdelete Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2005
    Posts:
    318
    Location:
    NL
    11 seconds :)
    P4 3 Ghz HT 1535 DDR
     
  22. Brian N

    Brian N Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,148
    Location:
    Denmark
    I got something like that on my desktop too (AMD-64 Cool & Quiet), it should stepup when needed, mine does.
    Think I'll test it without that option enabled, see if I get a better time or not :)
    ^ Nope I didn't, same scan time.
     
  23. auriell

    auriell Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Posts:
    105
    Location:
    Warsaw, Poland
    1.1699 (20060809) NT
    14 sec (00:00:14)
     
  24. YeOldeStonecat

    YeOldeStonecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Posts:
    2,345
    Location:
    Along the Shorelines somewhere in New England
    Surely someone here has a newer rig that will break into the single digit range..my system is getting old.
    Pentium 3.0c running at 3.3, 1.5 gigs RAM, Raptor 10krpm SATA drive.

    Been holding on a long overdue upgrade for the Intel Quadcores to come out. :D

    http://www.speedguide.net/~brian/nod32scan.JPG
     
  25. Lollan

    Lollan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Posts:
    288
    14 Seconds here as well.

    AMD Opteron 165 2GB DDR400.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.