AV-Comparatives AV-Comparatives Performance Test - September 2024

[simmerskool]

I use the Pro version and based on my testing it is the best. It's not cheap though.

and you typically install apps with TU monitoring so TU can fully undo the installation? or do you just use TU to uninstall and it is good at finding everything.

 

[roger_m]

and you typically install apps with TU monitoring so TU can fully undo the installation?

I always use its monitoring.

 

[bazang]

I agree with you and @bazang. Real world use on my end with F-Secure I haven't noticed this either (4 PC's). Including PC's with 8GB of RAM and one Windows 10 PC with a 4th generation Intel Core i3 cpu.

I guess if that were the case according to the chart, Bitdefender users would be a little miffed or wondering about that one, too?

The only way to know for sure what exactly AV-Comparatives is talking about is to download the Procyon test suite that it uses and test it yourself.

AV-Comparatives does test for shutdown and boot times, but never publishes them.

They use a "Good, Better, Best" qualitative, relative ranking system that makes absolutely no sense. People need a perception of time to judge. AV-Comparatives saying "F-Secure was in the Better category for file copy and program launch, making slower than most of the others." is not helpful. In fact, it deserves a STFW? Unless a test lab publishes a matrix that lists times in units of time that people can understand, the entire point of the whole test is lost. The results mean virtually nothing.

Now "F-Secure was on average 300 ms slower than other tested software" - that is something people get a concept of what the result means, but they have no measure of 300 ms because they cannot perceive a 300 ms delay. Hypothetical example.

 

[simmerskool]

Now "F-Secure was on average 300 ms slower than other tested software" - that is something people get a concept of what the result means, but they have no measure of 300 ms because they cannot perceive a 300 ms delay. Hypothetical example.

well agree, but if sitting at your keyboard you cannot perceive (feel) a 300 ms delay then imo it is not a meaningful slowdown whether some tester tells me it is 300 ms.

 

[Szellem]

I don't always agree with the results of the tests either, because I experience something different.
Sometimes it's true, sometimes it's not. F-Secure is sometimes slower in file copying, program startup, sometimes not.
Kaspersky also depends on releases for its behaviour. For example, Windows File Manager for Kaspersky starts slower on first startup.
Different configurations have different behaviour. That's why you should test the product before buying a license to see how it behaves on your machine.

 

[bazang]

well agree, but if sitting at your keyboard you cannot perceive (feel) a 300 ms delay then imo it is not a meaningful slowdown whether some tester tells me it is 300 ms.

Exactly. I wonder why antivirus publishers pay AV-Comparatives for this test. Anything AV-Comparatives does costs quite a bit of money. There are no "cheap" AV-Comparatives tests. The publishers do it because the average computer user is sensitive to any perceived "degradation" of performance. Therefore, they parlay the "Good, Better, Best" test results into marketing. It is misleading like so much of software marketing is misleading. People understand "Good, Better, Best" even though it is not realistic or meaningful.

 

[Virtuoso]

I use F-Secure and the program startup delay thing is true.

 

[tofargone]

I use the Pro version and based on my testing it is the best. It's not cheap though.

Roger did u check out the new Ashampoo Uninstaller with constant monitoring? (Very low resource use)

 

[roger_m]

Roger did u check out the new Ashampoo Uninstaller with constant monitoring? (Very low resource use)

I haven't yet, although I have used it in the past.