Raiden

Level 13
Verified
Content Creator
look the boot 50 c ;) And when i tested SHP for one week i saw the same results. Huge ram and very slow boot
Ya in my experience there's a definite lag when I'm logging into windows. It could be that I've gotten use to WD which I think has the fastest bootup/log in time of all security programs, so any small lag I notice, but SHP definitely has a lag when logging in. It's not crazy by any means, but its noticable. I've emailed their support to let them know about it, so hopefully we will see an improvement one day on this.(y)
Do you remember about how much ram was used?
I'll have to check later ht of I remember correctly when you add up all the processes, it was around 150-200 mb in my experience. They do have a ton of processes running, another thing I hope they fix down the road, but for me the ram usage isn't too bad. Overall once your logged in SHP is not really noticable IMO. Sometimes there's a slight lag when opening programs for the first time, but in my experience most 3rd parties have a lag when it comes to opening a program for the first time.

I say still give it a try and see what you think, it's a solid program that offers great protection.:)(y)
 
Last edited:

blackice

Level 8
Verified
Ya in my experience there's a definite lag when I'm logging into windows. It could be that I've gotten use to WD which I think has the fastest bootup/log in time of all security programs, so any small lag I notice, but SHP definitely has a lag when logging in. It's not crazy by any means, but its noticable. I've emailed their support to let them know about it, so hopefully we will see an improvement one day on this.(y)

I'll have to check later ht of I remember correctly when you add up all the processes, it was around 150-200 mb in my experience. They do have a ton of processes running, another thing I hope they fix down the road, but for me the ram usage isn't too bad. Overall once your logged in SHP is not really noticable IMO. Sometimes there's a slight lag when opening programs for the first time, but in my experience most 3rd parties have a lag when it comes to opening a program for the first time.

I say still give it a try and see what you think, it's a solid program that offers great protection.:)(y)
Definitely will give it a shot. I only reboot about once a week anyway, so a slightly longer boot isn’t terrible, although with WD it is lightning fast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: upnorth

stefanos

Level 22
Verified
Ya in my experience there's a definite lag when I'm logging into windows. It could be that I've gotten use to WD which I think has the fastest bootup/log in time of all security programs, so any small lag I notice, but SHP definitely has a lag when logging in. It's not crazy by any means, but its noticable. I've emailed their support to let them know about it, so hopefully we will see an improvement one day on this.(y)

I'll have to check later ht of I remember correctly when you add up all the processes, it was around 150-200 mb in my experience. They do have a ton of processes running, another thing I hope they fix down the road, but for me the ram usage isn't too bad. Overall once your logged in SHP is not really noticable IMO. Sometimes there's a slight lag when opening programs for the first time, but in my experience most 3rd parties have a lag when it comes to opening a program for the first time.

I say still give it a try and see what you think, it's a solid program that offers great protection.:)(y)
but it remains a heavy program. :giggle:
 

stefanos

Level 22
Verified
Heavy is in the eye of the beholder, or system. On a 4GB system that’s massive, on an 8+ there’s probably ram to use. Unused ram is wasted ram. If it isn’t slow to respond or freeze the. I’m not too worried.
For last time . Have slow boot. Delay aplications, and consume many ram. I am not care if one system have 4 gb ram or 16 gb ram. The program is heavy compare it with other antivirus.

Do you remember about how much ram was used?
150 to 300 gb
 

blackice

Level 8
Verified
For last time . Have slow boot. Delay aplications, and consume many ram. I am not care if one system have 4 gb ram or 16 gb ram. The program is heavy compare it with other antivirus.


150 to 300 gb
That’s fair, but on a desktop that doesn’t reboot often or close and open programs constantly these aren’t as perceptible. I’m not saying the problems aren’t there, I’m saying for different users they may not notice these issues as much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raiden and upnorth

stefanos

Level 22
Verified
That’s fair, but on a desktop that doesn’t reboot often or close and open programs constantly these aren’t as perceptible. I’m not saying the problems aren’t there, I’m saying for different users they may not notice these issues as much.
I do a lot of tests when I have time. I do not publish because I do not know English. I just disseminate the results I see. I am not a supporter of any program
 

davisd

Level 2
Verified
SHP will slow down overall system performance in first hours to days, depending on the system and overall disk size/files/programs you have, until it settles down, at first, some might find that really annoying, at that is what causes medium/high RAM usage, it will be much lower later on and system will be more responsive and snappy.
 

stefanos

Level 22
Verified
SHP will slow down overall system performance in first hours to days, depending on the system and overall disk size/files/programs you have, until it settles down, at first, some might find that really annoying, at that is what causes medium/high RAM usage, it will be much lower later on and system will be more responsive and snappy.
I do not say you do not use it or that it does not have good protection. Everyone chooses what they like. I just tested it and it's a lot heavy compare with many other antivirus. The less I test a product is a week. And not in a virtual machine. My opinion is just for the performance

Hear, hear! (y) (y) (y)

@stefanos I was only kidding, because I know you don't have 300 gb RAM. :D
I'm sick with the RAM :ROFLMAO:
 

Evjl's Rain

Level 42
Verified
Trusted
Content Creator
Malware Hunter
You need to take the Ram usage with a grain of salt. An interesting article: Why antivirus uses so much RAM - And why that is actually a good thing! | Emsisoft | Security Blog.
nah, don't listen to everything the vendor tells you
I hate any AV which uses excessive amount of RAM because the more free RAM, the more room for other things to run, especially when you are gaming (heavy games)
more RAM usage = system has to push more blocks of memory to virtual memory = more chance of system slowdown = higher rate of HDD/SSD degradation
in fact, emsisoft is the only AV in the history causing my system to BSOD (multiple times) due to out-of-memory while gaming
it consumed >600MB of RAM regardless of memory optimization option checked or unchecked
memory optimization simply pushes mem. blocks from physical RAM to virtual memory (pagefile) but in fact it still uses the exact same amount in total

free ram is a waste but using too much like emsisoft is a crime. At least for me
 

17410742

Level 4
Ram is there to be used, higher ram usage means greater efficiency & performance.

Un-used RAM is wasted & pointless ram

if you need to use something that requires a lot of ram, your system should adjust accordingly.

as for the 50s boot in the video above, i only have an 8gb laptop with an i5 & it seems fine on mine - not really seeing a performance or boot speed drop compared to the few ive tried in the past month. (bitdefender/f-secure etc)
 

Attachments

blackice

Level 8
Verified
Okay, I got bored and finally had some time to try installing this. First of all the first scan took only a few minutes to complete and found a bunch of tracking cookies and that's it. Secondly after rebooting (which was fast) I scanned again and it again only took 5 minutes. I'm very surprised. Almost wondering if it's not scanning much of the computer or what.

Also I asked support if they use a certificate for SSL scanning. Nick said "He believes so", but I don't see a new certificate. HTTP sites show a Sophos warming, HTTPS sites just fail to load. It's the same thing that happens with the Gryphon router with ESET. I am wondering if it's some sort of packet inspection...not sure how it works.
 

Raiden

Level 13
Verified
Content Creator
Okay, I got bored and finally had some time to try installing this. First of all the first scan took only a few minutes to complete and found a bunch of tracking cookies and that's it. Secondly after rebooting (which was fast) I scanned again and it again only took 5 minutes. I'm very surprised. Almost wondering if it's not scanning much of the computer or what.
Ya it' hasn't taken more than 5 mins for me either, which really isn't too bad IMHO. The fastest scanner is Emsisoft's no one comes close IMO, most AV's I've tried over the years seems to take 3-5 mins, so I would say Sophos is right up there. I did check with their support and they said that it uses both their own engine, as well as HMP. They also said that it has been updated to have more scanning and update abilities, so it is probably why it's a little slow initally, but speeds up shortly after.

Also I asked support if they use a certificate for SSL scanning. Nick said "He believes so", but I don't see a new certificate. HTTP sites show a Sophos warming, HTTPS sites just fail to load. It's the same thing that happens with the Gryphon router with ESET. I am wondering if it's some sort of packet inspection...not sure how it works.
I did verify this with them and yes, SHP does both HTTP and HTTPS scanning.
 

blackice

Level 8
Verified
Ya it' hasn't taken more than 5 mins for me either, which really isn't too bad IMHO. The fastest scanner is Emsisoft's no one comes close IMO, most AV's I've tried over the years seems to take 3-5 mins, so I would say Sophos is right up there. I did check with their support and they said that it uses both their own engine, as well as HMP. They also said that it has been updated to have more scanning and update abilities, so it is probably why it's a little slow initally, but speeds up shortly after.


I did verify this with them and yes, SHP does both HTTP and HTTPS scanning.
So far I like it. The UI is weird and it is odd that there’s no protection to add or turn up. Also that it doesn’t do a full scan of all drives is different. But it seems simple, out of the way, and slick. Also the system impact wasn’t bad at all.