Which one is lighter and has less internet slowdows?

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by Opeth, Nov 3, 2005.

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

    Opeth Guest

    Which one is lighter and has less internet slowdows? ZA or OP? I know both are top, so which one slows down less the internet?
     
  2. hollywoodpc

    hollywoodpc Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Posts:
    1,325
    The general consensus is ZAP does NOT slow down browsing as much as OP . That is unfair to say as a fact though . It really depends on your setup . Try each one and see which has less drag for you . Seems you know you want one of the two mentioned and that is half the battle . ZAP may slow you down more but , you may like the look and feel of it better than OP and vice versa . Try each one for a few days and I think you will know which to get .
    Hope that helps
     
  3. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,779
    Well, for Outpost, I made these two registry tweaks as suggested in another thread, and found that with that done, Outpost is just as fast as any of the other ones in it's class. The first one enables gzip compression and is what's needed since Outpost disables compression otherwise, apparently so that it's content and ad filtering can function. Some sites can send pages compressed if requested by the browser, which is what most browser do nowadays I guess. The 2nd reg entry I'm not sure about, but I did it too, just for the heck of it.

    HKLM\software\agnitum\outpost firewall\EnableGzipEncoding=1
    HKLM\software\agnitum\outpost firewall\FixServerErrorsinSend=1

    Apparently this could cause some of the content/ad filtering to not work, however, I found that much of it still did work since not all web sites will send the data compressed, so if it doesn't then filtering still functions fine.

    If they are going to continue disabling compression internally, then I think they should at least offer a config option and allow the user to enable it or disable it that way as desired. It does seem to effect browser performance.
     
  4. Arup

    Arup Guest

    No slowdowns with ZAP that I know of or have experienced, I do keep the add ons off, the privacy ones tend to slow down browsing but not downloads.
     
  5. sweater

    sweater Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,674
    Location:
    Philippines, the Political Dynasty Capital of the
    :oops: I think if you're really looking for a firewall that won't disappoint you for those internet speed things, then better stay away from Zone Alarm and Outpost Pro... coz they can really affects internet speed browsing.:'(

    Of course they're good... really good... except for the slow down of net speed. You can try it and see for yourself.
     
  6. QBgreen

    QBgreen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Posts:
    627
    Location:
    Queens County, NY
    It has been my experience that enabling ad blocking and privacy features in both these firewalls decreases net speed dramatically. This also holds true for Kerio 4.2.xx, and I'm willing to bet other firewalls that have these features. So there! :D
     
  7. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,779
    QBgreen you are quite right indeed! I noticed this particulary in Kerio 4.2.2 recently, the difference appeared to be quite dramatic too. Good point..
     
  8. dcc

    dcc Guest

    [speed; cpu load; firewall]
    [3.5 Mb/s; 1%; windows firewall + wipfw, or jetico 1.0]
    [3.2 Mb/s; 55%; outpost 3.0]
    [2.9 Mb/s; 24%; BlackIce 3.6]
    [2.4 Mb/s; 9x%; ZA 6.0]

    i use optical fibre connection, line speed is 100Mbps (~12Mb/s), windows xp sp2. the speed above is the steady speed while downloading 100Mb file, cpu load is peak load.
     
  9. dcc

    dcc Guest

    the slowest firewall i experienced is kerio serverfirewall 1.0, speed only 7xx-9xx Kb/s; for kerio 2.1.5 speed is ~3.4 Mb/s, cpu load is x%-3x% while dl a 100Mb file.
     
  10. lookcity

    lookcity Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Posts:
    46
    Location:
    China
    Maybe :
    Look 'n' stop
    Kerio
    :rolleyes:
     
  11. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,779
    Strange... I get 3.79 Mbps here with ZA 6.1 on a large file. Slightly lower for Outpost Pro with the reg tweaks to enable gzip compression, about 3.5 Mbps. Kerio 4.2.2 is a little lower still at 3.4. Haven't tried BI though. But my results with ZA/ZAP are quite good compared to yours..
     
  12. Arup

    Arup Guest

    Actually with P2P, ZAP is faster than my router but I have all the extras off.
     
  13. nod32.9

    nod32.9 Guest

    ZA should be faster with most systems.
     
  14. dcc

    dcc Guest

    my result for za 6.0 is 2.4 Mb/s(mega byte per second), which means 2.4*8=19.2 Mbps, sorry for my unit used. it is the average speed when dl a 100mb file from a test server.

    for look'n'stop 2.05, speed is 3.5 megabyte/s.

    actualll i am behind a router, so my line speed is slower (don't know why it slow down), if directly connected to the line from ISP i have ~12 mega byte per second, but still the results shows when connection speed gets higher, some firewalls tend to use more cpu and slow down speed, i'm not to test the precise performance of firewalls, just to roughly compare different firewalls.
     
  15. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,779
    Ok, nevertheless, my speed for ZA/ZAP relative to the others was quite good though. In fact, it was the best I get here. So I'm not sure why it performed so poorly on your tests. ZA has always been good on speed for me.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.