Performance

Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 Antivirus v4 Beta Forum' started by chrisf8657, Mar 1, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. chrisf8657

    chrisf8657 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Posts:
    18
    Eset needs to keep in mind that what made it #1 was the performance of their product - I'm starting to see some bloat in the software and it not being as fast as it used to be. I understand with more features comes some slower performance, but I don't feel V3 AND V4 is anywhere near what 2.7 offered.

    I encourage you gentelemen to do some further optimization of the software and performance.
     
  2. stratoc

    stratoc Guest

    i completely agree, i had to stop using v2, v3 is ok but v4? no thanks, it has things i simply dont need/ want. looking around at av programs there seem to be a hole in the market that nod used to fill.
    v2 was a breathe of fresh air with the other security solutions available at the time, they all seem to be going the same way. i hate having to use security programs, but i have to, and i want them to be in the background using next to nothing doing their job silently, just like v2 did.
    gaming forums now have people switching TO norton from others, now who would have believed that 4 years ago?
    eset, stay unique, please.
     
  3. ambient_88

    ambient_88 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    854
    There's only so much optimization ESET can do for their security products. As it is, NOD32 is already really fast. Besides, hardware nowadays are so much better than the ones from the late 90s/early 2000s that a slight increase in memory/CPU usage is virtually irrelevant.
     
  4. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    thanks to the ridiculous demo videos here ?
    http://www.symantec.com/norton/anti...hobanner_norton_antivirus_gaming_edition_2009

    3 demo movies - so much fun (... " there was a pop-up" ... "the antivirus software"..."the was and update"..."and the zombies"...) ROFL ! :D That's ridicuous , if there are such people , they are mentally ill . It seems Symantec want such clients ... Forbes wouldn't strive for such readers but would recommend ESET , right ?!
     
  5. stratoc

    stratoc Guest

    those people are kids, kids who go to lan parties, kids who care about an extra 50 points on 3d benchmark that is who they are targeting, obviously this works due to symantec's market share otherwise i agree with you.
     
  6. nb1001

    nb1001 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Posts:
    5
    i think performance is actually better, at startup v4 loads much faster than v3 and v2
     
  7. JasSolo

    JasSolo Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Posts:
    414
    Location:
    Denmark
    ....and the so called acting in these demos :ouch: ....~Snip~ what a turn off, it really makes you ABSOLUTELY NOT wanting to buy these products :thumbd: .


    Cheers
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 1, 2009
  8. MasterTB

    MasterTB Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2007
    Posts:
    547
    Location:
    Paran?, Argentina
    Hilarious, that's all I can say.
    And to think that people actually buys into this publicity.
     
  9. GrammatonCleric

    GrammatonCleric Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Posts:
    372
    AMEN!!!
    I was a version a version 1 (Pulsating Zit Version) user in 2000 then 2.7 around 2k3 I believe and recently I've been beta testing V4 and BOY WHAT A HUGE IMPACT IN PERFORMANCE!

    I mean Nod32 and Norton has swapped places in my book.
    Norton 2k9 became as light as Nod 2.7 and Nod 2.7 became as resource heavy and system "laggy" as Norton 2k7 and is saying a lot.

    ESET, if you want to keep your customer base then lighten the resource hit or else Norton 2k9 seems like a more then worthy competitor in both the detection and resource usage.

    It would be sad for me to depart with ESET after about 10 years of usage, but well I value my CPU cycles, I have not paid the top dollar for a fast CPU/system just to have it used up and reduced to a value system.

    P.S.
    Don't get me started on the outpost and Nod 3,4 fiasco...Outpost was the main reason why I stayed with 2.7 for soo long, I do not want to quit on a great FW.
     
  10. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,852
    I disagree, V4 has improved on performance over v3. Also, neither versions use anywhere near the CPU of Symantec products, regardless of RAM usage.
     
  11. GrammatonCleric

    GrammatonCleric Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Posts:
    372

    Don't know about that, I am currently giving Norton 2k9 a 15 day trial and so far so good. I don't see the CPU usage...whereupon many times V4 beta would spike my CPU to 100% when openning folder with large amount of files in them etc.

    I never used Version 3 so I can't comment on 3 to 4 jump, I can only comment on 2.7 to 4 jump.

    Performance hit is the reason why I asked for the "best optimized/configured" V4 in the Main AV sub forum.

    I don't care that much about RAM I have 4 Gigs of it, and when need to be I can go to 6/8 (switch to 64 bits) it's the LAG* when openning folders and files that scares the crap out of me.

    *LAG = System enters non-responsive mode, or files take at least 10 seconds to open.

    I guess I will give V4 a whirl (again) when Blackspear posts the updated "guide" and when my 15 day trial of Norton runs out.

    Don't want to scrap my few years of subscription with ESET, but I might as well stick it on a router/lappy if need to be.
     
  12. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,852
    That would be default settings, not Blackspears.

    When you have Advanced Heuristics it's going to power through emulating every single file in the folder, considering what a resource intensive process this is, I'm surprised the spike is so little, Norton does not have the advanced heuristics of ESET.

    A 10 second spike could mean several things including many large or executable files. If it is a single file causing it, it could potentially mean a problem with AH and that file, in which case simply reporting the issue can get that solved.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.