Performance Test by Tune- Up Blog

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Nevis, Jun 16, 2011.

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

    Nevis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Posts:
    786
    Location:
    255.255.255.255
  2. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
    I wonder what crap computers they ran the tests on when the quickest boot time, without any security software, was 180 seconds!
     
  3. Nevis

    Nevis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Posts:
    786
    Location:
    255.255.255.255
    lol, nice find
     
  4. EternalFunction

    EternalFunction Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Posts:
    40
    probably lots of junk startup items..?
     
  5. malexous

    malexous Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Posts:
    828
    Location:
    Ireland
    Usually Norton has two processes running, not three.
     
  6. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,075
    An intel core i7 extreme with 8gb ram with a clean win7 installation and the latest version of TuneUp Utilities 2011 with all the recomemded settings :D :D
     
  7. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    probably a laptop? :D
     
  8. markusg

    markusg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Posts:
    248
    this is normal after some sessions with tuneup :d
     
  9. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    MSE in the front but whenever i tried it it took like half a minute to display a folder with few slightly bigger EXE in it. All the icons were generic EXE until scanned and then icons appeared. And its the fastest. HOW!?!??!!?! Lol...
     
  10. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    Only 5 products? Also comparing suites against a standalone AV. Meh.
     
  11. iravgupta

    iravgupta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Posts:
    605
    That's my experience too but then this is one aspect that I have never see tested in any performance test. IMHO the impact an AV has on explorer.exe is one of the biggest factors in determining how 'light' is the system perceived to be by the user.
     
  12. iravgupta

    iravgupta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Posts:
    605
    180 seconds can happen on relatively fast systems too depending on -

    1. you have skype and WLM on start-up.
    2. weather skype and WLM were set to auto-login in the background.
    3. the kind of network connection the PC was using during tests - for e.g. for certain atheros and broadcom wi-fi cards the start-up time is too high.
     
  13. Kernelwars

    Kernelwars Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Posts:
    2,155
    Location:
    TX
    too bad dont see G-DATA, bitdefender, Lavasoft Internet Security, Emsisoft not included:cautious: all the monsters left out:rolleyes:
     
  14. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    You forgot TrustPort and Coranti. There's MetaScan as well.
     
  15. PJC

    PJC Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,959
    Location:
    Internet
    +1. :thumb:
     
  16. AlexC

    AlexC Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Posts:
    1,280
    In my experience, MSE is heavy.
     
  17. xxJackxx

    xxJackxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Posts:
    4,049
    Location:
    USA
    Mine too. I think people think it is light because the simple interface does not show you what it is doing. Ont time I was using a system with MSE and it was running very slow. It (MSE) was giving no indication of doing anything but I found in Process Explorer that is was scanning a rather large .iso file I had on the hard drive.
     
  18. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    After making it scan incoming only (only new files), it is light.
     
  19. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    And why do you have to do that when other programs don't need such restrictions to work fast?
     
  20. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    Ask Microsoft, I'm not sure myself. Probably something to do with their engine speed, and the fact that they don't use caching.
     
  21. steve1955

    steve1955 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Posts:
    1,384
    Location:
    Sunny(in my dreams)Manchester,England
    surely it isn't the amount of time the PC takes to do anything but the increase caused by the suites?:-isn't this type of test just to show the hit on performance not overall performance of the PC used?
     
  22. toxinon12345

    toxinon12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Posts:
    1,200
    Location:
    Managua, Nicaragua
    Lol... An amateur performance test arguing ESET is fast and with low resource usage, based on incorrect methods of testing

    unbelievable, but true
     
  23. Syobon

    Syobon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Posts:
    469
  24. toxinon12345

    toxinon12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Posts:
    1,200
    Location:
    Managua, Nicaragua
    I would recommend PassMark performance tests, too. ;)
     
  25. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,559
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.