performance tests..

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by zfactor, Jan 13, 2010.

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

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    i could have sworn i saw more than the av comp one somewhere. am i crazy or can someone tell me where another recent one is? thanks
     
  2. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,739
    Location:
    New York City
  3. FloorMatt

    FloorMatt Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    13
  4. EliteKiller

    EliteKiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Posts:
    1,138
    Location:
    TX
    sorry....
     
  5. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    yeah the passmark one was the one i saw. thanks

    also was that the one sponsored by symantec?
     
  6. Dark_Hanzo

    Dark_Hanzo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Posts:
    172
    Location:
    Canada
  7. subset

    subset Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Posts:
    825
    Location:
    Austria
    Passmark promo, er, test is also sponsored by Symantec.
    A lot of money for the best propaganda, er, research.

    Cheers
     
  8. Zombini

    Zombini Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Posts:
    469
    Gotta love all the FUD.
     
  9. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    Very true ;)
     
  10. Pleonasm

    Pleonasm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Posts:
    1,201
    Yes, Symantec funded the Anti-Virus and Internet Security Products Performance Benchmarking (2010).

    However, did you notice that Norton Internet Security 2010 didn’t score in first place in Benchmark 1 (Boot Time), Benchmark 4 (User Interface Launch Time), Benchmark 5 (Memory Usage during System Idle), Benchmark 6 (Browse Time), Benchmark 7 (Internet Explorer Launch Time), Benchmark 8 (Installation Time), Benchmark 9 (Installation Size), Benchmark 10 (Registry Key Count), Benchmark 11 (File Copy, Move and Delete), Benchmark 12 (Installation of Third Party Applications), Benchmark 13 (Network Throughput), Benchmark 15 (File Compression and Decompression), and Benchmark 16 (File Write, Open and Close)?

    But, obviously, Symantec is controlling and manipulating the test results. :rolleyes: (Sarcasm intended.)
     
  11. subset

    subset Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Posts:
    825
    Location:
    Austria
    @ Pleonasm

    I paid a tester to thoroughly compare our cars.
    The test result is that my car is beautiful and yours is ugly.
    Result accepted? Of course! :thumb:

    In fact it doesn't matter if you accept the result or not.
    Like Symantec I didn't ask other competitors prior to testing or before publication. :cool:

    Cheers
     
  12. Pleonasm

    Pleonasm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Posts:
    1,201
    Occam's razor states that the simplest explanation is, more often than not, the best. The simplest explanation for the solid performance of Norton products in the PassMark test is that those product are indeed excellent. It takes quite a bit of convoluted conspiratorial circumlocution to “explain” away the results otherwise.
     
  13. Templar

    Templar Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Posts:
    114
    I think NIS is a great product but the tests for example from Passmark aren't the ultimate truth even tho I believe they do of course reflect a lot of truth.

    Take for example the "scan speed test". There was analysis of what and how those scans where so it's impossible to rate the best and fastest scan speed without a further more thorough test etc.

    Nothing is perfect and these tests are useful but people shouldn't make their decisions solely based upon them etc.

    Advanced users such as myself I don't like the limited firewall in NIS and I think the user interface is overbloated and too many "protection" engines which could be summed into a single name called "active protection" instead of braking it down to 7 different "shields". However this is my opinion and the same thing I'm complaining about in NIS is something that will make some one else happy etc.

    I'm just glad we have a lot of good software to choose from.
     
  14. iravgupta

    iravgupta Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Posts:
    605
    But somehow when avast! does the same thing by breaking down its protection into multiple shields - IM,P2P,Mail etc, nobody complains.
     
  15. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    @ Templar: do you know you can set the firewall to advanced mode and create custom rules etc....under advanced mode its not at all a bad firewall, agreed with the multi procc's.. i hate programs that run 20 different ones in the backround. if some companies can do it with one or two imo no reason all those are needed
     
  16. EliteKiller

    EliteKiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Posts:
    1,138
    Location:
    TX
    FWIW Templar appears to be referring to active protection, or shields (p2p, network, im, etc.), and not individual processes.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.