www.av-comparatives.org
www.av-comparatives.org
www.av-comparatives.org
I'm waiting for the performance test. Hope they include F-Secure backGreat to see F-Secure tested again.
Good protection, a lot of false positives (13), but of low prevalence, see false alarms test:
False Alarm Test March 2023
The False Alarm Test March 2023 is an appendix to the File Detection Test March 2021 listing details about the discovered False Alarms.
McAfee surprising me
probably no fresh samples otherwise wouldn't be almost 100% detection by McAfee
The exact same thing I had on my mind after viewing the results. Our device and online security is the main concern, then performance follows that for me. I uninstalled a different AV from my home business PCs as I could sense things running slow, even when allowing the programs in Exceptions. Forms filled in more slowly, and the CAD software seemed sluggish. Once I installed F-Secure, it was like I got my PC back, and I could see and feel things responding more quickly. Kaspersky also did well as far as performance on those PCs.
Microsoft Defender is also free, also has 100% and less FP's than Avast
Don't like Defender ,too heavy.Microsoft Defender is also free, also has 100% and less FP's than Avast
Depends on your PC, for my old desktop Malware Defender is faster (less heavy) than Avast, Kaspersky. Bitdefender, Avira (all Free) and the Ziggo branded F-secure of my ISP (and even ESET!) So mileage may vary with each PC.
I measured AppTimer program startups, MD was simply faster.Is this a new AV?
I know there are a lot of people disliking MD.I am not claiming MD is faster on every PC, just posting it is faster on My desktop and on my wife's Ryzen5 laptop (although differences are minimal on her laptop). As I said, your mileage may vary, IMO depends on your PC and or software configuration, does not mean that my observation complies with your observation (or preference) or that my truth prevails over your truth, just saying: it depends ...
Hey, I believe you, I was just trying to be funny, I'm sure you meant Microsoft Defender.I measured AppTimer program startups, MD was simply faster.
It's not heavy at all on my PC. It's actually lighter than ESET and Kaspersky. Those have I used before.
Notice I said on my PC, and not a completely recommendation for everyone. It's true that RAM usage is not the only factor to consider when measuring the performance of an AV. But for my usage, I can't have a AV that uses up to 800MB when I'm gaming at high level FPS game.That's not how you measure if an Antivirus is heavy or not. It's about how fast or slow it acts when scanning files as you are installing a program, launching programs, visiting websites, uncompressing files, copying large amounts of data, etc.
Do you really think AV-Comparatives opens task manager, checks the RAM and CPU usage at idle and score the performance of security solutions that way?
I could care less about RAM usage in today's world where we have lots of RAM on most computers. I am not going to start a flame war by telling you how heavy Windows Defender is. I could feel I downgraded my laptop the moment I use defender and no, it's not a slow laptop by any means, here are the specs:
Alienware m15 R7 | AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX | Micron 64 GB 4800 MHz DDR5 RAM | GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 16 GB GDDR6 | 15.6" QHD 240Hz 2ms 400-Nit ComfortView Plus G-SYNC Screen | WD_BLACK SN850X 2TB + 4TB SSDs | Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX210 | Windows 11 Pro
The system and everything a user does always feel very snappy with Bitdefender and Norton. No visible compromise of performance can be observed. I can’t say the same about Defender, every time I decide to give it a chance, I am reminded of its performance.
