PassMark Benchmarking AV sotfware

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Cadoul, Sep 17, 2008.

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

    Cadoul Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    76
    Location:
    France
  2. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    Hey,
    benchmark 6 installation time.
    avira 8 free installing faster than norton 2009 BS.
    i wonder if they just checked the folders in program files? or the hidden data folder also?
    symantec say norton 2009 100mb plus database. but this test says 49mb? i dont think the IS would add an extra 50mb disc space.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2008
  3. GES/POR

    GES/POR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,490
    Location:
    Armacham
    Looks like an ad for Norton 2009.
     
  4. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    thats what i thought lol.
    why else would norton 2009 be the only av with a different colour bar and get top results in all benchmarks?
     
  5. steve1955

    steve1955 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Posts:
    1,384
    Location:
    Sunny(in my dreams)Manchester,England
    Some of the benchmarks aren't really things to concern users:-who really bothers about installation size?does 100mb here or there really matter nowadays with size of the HDs on most PCs?
    Does how fast the GUI comes up really matter?Does installation time really matter?
     
  6. GES/POR

    GES/POR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,490
    Location:
    Armacham
    I havent read well through the report but i guess the yellow bar means best allround product.
     
  7. GES/POR

    GES/POR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,490
    Location:
    Armacham
    Well steve i wouldnt want to have the product that would stand in the bottom in all benchmarks.
     
  8. Cadoul

    Cadoul Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    76
    Location:
    France
  9. icr

    icr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Posts:
    1,588
    Location:
    Mumbai
    I know that NIS 2009 has improved much than the previous one but i don't believe that it tops in almost all the benchmarks
     
  10. PassMark

    PassMark Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2007
    Posts:
    8
    The method used was to start with a clean Vista install, then install the product, looking at the before and after free disk space across the entire drive.

    So all files and folders should be picked up, as well as picking up some additional O/S related file changes like roll back points and Vista Shadow Copy files, if applicable.
     
  11. PassMark

    PassMark Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2007
    Posts:
    8
    The top 3 positions were fairly close in fact. The report documents the test process, so the results should be largely repeatable if you had the inclination to do so.

    There has been a big push this year (by several companies) to really improve the performance of their products.
    [Disclaimer: I wrote some of the report]
     
  12. SKA

    SKA Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Posts:
    154
    Passmark

    I am vey impressed with the design(types of testings) and the results' presentation. Its comprehensive, and I learnt a lot from it. Thanks to Cadoul for the link and to you for your comments

    SKA
     
  13. silver0066

    silver0066 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Posts:
    929
    Passmark,

    Thanks for the information. That is one of the best and most authoritave reports I have ever seen on the subject of speed.

    That report combined with AVComparatives is very enlightening.

    Silver
     
  14. reldel

    reldel Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2007
    Posts:
    20
    Location:
    Felton, DE, USA
    Bear in mind that the report ordered and paid for by Symantec.
     
  15. InfinityAz

    InfinityAz Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Posts:
    828
    Location:
    Arizona
    I'd agree with Silver, this is very well done (even if done by and for Norton marketing efforts).

    The only thing I would have liked to have seen is the inclusion of baselines, where appropriate, for the performance without any AV or Internet Suite. This way you could also get an idea of the impact upon the system and not just a comparison between AVs or Suites.
     
  16. Balatsokas

    Balatsokas Former Poster

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Posts:
    86
    Location:
    Land of NoWhere
    Oooops... :D
     
  17. Coolio10

    Coolio10 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,124
    Says who?
     
  18. reldel

    reldel Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2007
    Posts:
    20
    Location:
    Felton, DE, USA
    See page 39 of report.
     
  19. Balatsokas

    Balatsokas Former Poster

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Posts:
    86
    Location:
    Land of NoWhere
    :D :D :D
     
  20. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    The key words :ouch:
     
  21. SKA

    SKA Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Posts:
    154
    What impressed me about the report was the elements chosen/ testing methods used. The fact that Norton showed up well is irrelevant for me, as I use NOD32.

    BUT, this report does show the huge improvements that Norton has achieved with 2009 releases.

    As it (the report) did not include Antivir(Avira) Premium/ Security Suite, it is difficult to compare how Antivir
    may fare in these/similar tests. I feel its well worth for AVIRA to sponsor or do similar/ better tests to aid their own marketing efforts.

    I'm a longtime NOD32 evaluating Antivir Premium(on Vista Biz)

    SKA
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.