AV-Comparatives performance test ( October)

[aliali]

https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/avc_per_201710_en.pdf

 

[Rengar]

Thank god they didnt test Comodo because its trash without tweaks.

 

[plat1098]

On the vastly open tundra of my C drives, Windows Defender runs free, FREE as the wind.

Offering much improved native protection with potentially lousy performance is a self-defeating prophecy. MpEngine needs a tune up.

 

[Andy Ful]

For daily usage, the test used PC Mark 10 Professional. From the program website we can see the tested workloads:
App Start-up, Web Browsing, Video Conferencing, Writing, Spreadsheets, Digital Content Creation (DCC), Photo Editing, Video Editing, Rendering and Visualization.
All AVs scored very well.
.
The big differences were in other tested workloads, especially for file copying and installing / uninstalling applications. Windows Defender was noticeably worse than most of AVs, here. There is a lot to learn for Microsoft in this area.
I tested myself file copying and the time ratio 'Defender Enabled' / 'Defender Disabled' = 8.
But, I do not think that the above performance chart could be thought as a real performance impact for daily work.

 

[Overlord]

I am surprised by the good result of ESET.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

For daily usage, the test used PC Mark 10 Professional. From the program website we can see the tested workloads:
App Start-up, Web Browsing, Video Conferencing, Writing, Spreadsheets, Digital Content Creation (DCC), Photo Editing, Video Editing, Rendering and Visualization.
All AVs scored very well.
.
The big differences were in other tested workloads, especially for file copying and installing / uninstalling applications. Windows Defender was noticeably worse than most of AVs, here. There is a lot to learn for Microsoft in this area.
I tested myself file copying and the time ratio 'Defender Enabled' / 'Defender Disabled' = 8.
But, I do not think that the above performance chart could be thought as a real performance impact for daily work.

I agree, I think it's better to test AVs ourselves + take a look at AV-C and AV-tests's tests especially the columns we do the most everyday (Launching applications, Browsing websites or file coping,...)

I usually don't take the tests from them seriously (<40%) but I 60-70% believe in their performance test for some AVs so if an AV performs badly in 2-3 tests by 2 testing companies (AVC, AV-test or MRG), I truly believe it's the same for most users except they refuse to test other AVs for enough amount of time or just don't want to switch

for me the lightest AV don't have on-access scanning: zemana & webroot, for example. They are super light
another factor should be the scanning speed. that's why emsisoft, immunet are really light

 

[RoboMan]

I was expecting to see one of this independent testers claim BitDefender and Kaspersky consume the less resources like everyone says on the internet for a couple of dollars... I have to totally agree with this test. ESET is literally the most light software i have ever tried, after trying Defender, BitDefender, Norton, Emsisoft and Kaspersky. Can't almost feel it!

 

[mlnevese]

The only way to know if a product is light or not is testing it on your own machine. No testing can account for all the variables involved.

 

[FrFc1908]

from my personal experience : trend , eset and bullguard run VERY light. fsecure and defender run heavy like an abraham tank!

 

[Lord Ami]

. fsecure and defender run heavy like an abraham tank!

Can't agree with that. Or can I?

Rule of thumb: Whatever AV runs light on your system, is light

 

[In2an3_PpG]

I am surprised by the good result of ESET.

Gotta figure ESET would take first place. Besides them, their only real competition that i know of is Webroot.

 

[Faybert]

The only surprise for me is Bitdefender in fourth place, since for me it was always the heaviest. F-Secure and ESET i agree, have always been the lightest.

 

[amico81]

Yes Eset is the king of lightness...my personal experience

 

[mlnevese]

The only surprise for me is Bitdefender in fourth place, since for me it was always the heaviest. F-Secure and ESET i agree, have always been the lightest.

I tested Bitdefender for a few days a week or so ago and was quite surprised by how light it was on my computer actually. As light as Kaspersky and way lighter than Windows Defender... That's why I always tell people to test this kind of software on their own systems...

 

[VeeekTor]

Is it.... "Bigger is Better"... On the graph ?

 

[Deleted Member 3a5v73x]

I am surprised by the good result of ESET.

Why surprised? Quite obvious performance test outcome, since It's coded in pure assembly.

 

[bribon77]

Good: There are things I share in this test. And others do not. I do not see that Kaspersky is lighter than Emsisoft.

 

[Windows_Security]

For daily usage, the test used PC Mark 10 Professional. From the program website we can see the tested workloads:
App Start-up, Web Browsing, Video Conferencing, Writing, Spreadsheets, Digital Content Creation (DCC), Photo Editing, Video Editing, Rendering and Visualization.
All AVs scored very well.
.
The big differences were in other tested workloads, especially for file copying and installing / uninstalling applications. Windows Defender was noticeably worse than most of AVs, here. There is a lot to learn for Microsoft in this area.
I tested myself file copying and the time ratio 'Defender Enabled' / 'Defender Disabled' = 8.
But, I do not think that the above performance chart could be thought as a real performance impact for daily work.

Would not 8 be something simular as Panda/AVG? Or am I completely misinterpreting the meaning of 8?

 

[Faybert]

I tested Bitdefender for a few days a week or so ago and was quite surprised by how light it was on my computer actually. As light as Kaspersky and way lighter than Windows Defender... That's why I always tell people to test this kind of software on their own systems...

Yes, each system is a different case, but unfortunately, Bitdefender has never been friendly with my computer, the performance falls a lot with it installed, even though I have a powerful pc.

 

[Andy Ful]

Would not 8 be something simular as Panda/AVG? Or am I completely misinterpreting the meaning of 8?

I did not test other AVs, but file copying eight times longer with Defender enabled as compared to Defender disabled, is not a great result.