Serious Discussion I am soo angry at you all now :)

General Security Discussions
19 Replies 2,559 Views

cartaphilus

Level 20
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
You have all now placed me in a pickle! I do not have enough computers to run all the different AV's I would like to test and play around with in real time and not in VM. I want to run ESET, Trend Micro, Checkpoint Harmony, F-Secure and DeepInstinct! #FirstWorldProblems

I will install all of them on my 386SX system!
 
Have multiple VMs, each one with a different product. Problem solved :alien:
Yeah, that's what I do. Easier to test all of them.
1720035215871.png
 
Yeah, that's what I do. Easier to test all of them.
View attachment 284136
Great setup!

Oh I fully understand. If I were testing for detection and protection then definitely I would just run it in a VM since the chances of a VM aware malware is low. However, I am performance testing my own setup to see which one of the solutions has the lowest impact on my system. Afterall, .the detection probability delta between those solutions is less than 1.5% thus not worth fighting over. Who cares if you have a 99.99% detection but the solution brings your I-14900K at 50Terahertz down to 8086?

I am testing it against office suites PCMark, gaming benchmarks running 3DMark, Assassin Creed Vikings Benchmark and Cyberpunk 2077 Benchmark. The runs are both with the AV running as it would normally run when playing a game and another test with the AV actively scanning.

I am not using some special testing methology in order to be exactly accurate since, I am not benching this for anyone else but my own personal satisfaction. Also, so I can proudly show my wife an amazing Excel graph regarding performance and watch her sigh, roll her eyes and walk away shaking her head (that test is to prove that; disapproving your husband's hobby does not cause blindness).
 
Great setup!

Oh I fully understand. If I were testing for detection and protection then definitely I would just run it in a VM since the chances of a VM aware malware is low. However, I am performance testing my own setup to see which one of the solutions has the lowest impact on my system. Afterall, .the detection probability delta between those solutions is less than 1.5% thus not worth fighting over. Who cares if you have a 99.99% detection but the solution brings your I-14900K at 50Terahertz down to 8086?

I am testing it against office suites PCMark, gaming benchmarks running 3DMark, Assassin Creed Vikings Benchmark and Cyberpunk 2077 Benchmark. The runs are both with the AV running as it would normally run when playing a game and another test with the AV actively scanning.

I am not using some special testing methology in order to be exactly accurate since, I am not benching this for anyone else but my own personal satisfaction. Also, so I can proudly show my wife an amazing Excel graph regarding performance and watch her sigh, roll her eyes and walk away shaking her head (that test is to prove that; disapproving your husband's hobby does not cause blindness).
I see. In that case of course you need to test them on your main system. For gaming I don't think anything would beat the default Microsoft Defender since games are made and tested on systems with Windows default before they get released. For other benchmarks surely other products are likely to perform better.
 
I'd probably do Mint, before a Mac :) Besides, it's kinda fun in doing this research, comparisons of different AV's :)
I do Zorin Pro 17.1 :love: before Mint and love it -- but yes kinda fun running 10 VM here with various AV, most recently G Data...
PS my notebook log of day to day events currently 15,817 lines of text and still I forget stuff :ROFLMAO:
 
@Bot please let me know if I missed something interesting, 'cause I haven't read the whole thread.

@cartaphilus
that reminds me of when I was rolling with 3(?) AVs. Maybe 4? It's in the archives somewhere here lol
Ran butter smooth...
 

Recently browsing

Members who viewed this thread in the last 5 minutes

Back
Top