AV-Comparatives Performance Test April 2020

Disclaimer

  1. This test shows how an antivirus behaves with certain threats, in a specific environment and under certain conditions.
    We encourage you to compare these results with others and take informed decisions on what security products to use.
    Before buying an antivirus you should consider factors such as price, ease of use, compatibility, and support. Installing a free trial version allows an antivirus to be tested in everyday use before purchase.

SeriousHoax

SeriousHoax

Level 55
Thread author
Verified
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Forum Veteran
Mar 16, 2019
4,434
34,951
5,380
Bangladesh
The following activities/tests were performed under an up-to-date Windows 10 1909 64-Bit system:

  • File copying
  • Archiving / unarchiving
  • Installing / uninstalling applications
  • Launching applications
  • Downloading files
  • Browsing Websites
  • PC Mark 10 Professional Testing Suite
1.PNG
Click to expand...
Check the full report here
 
  • Like
  • Thanks
  • Applause
Reactions: Burrito, miguelang611, JB007 and 16 others
SumTingWong said:
And Bitdefender :oops:.

Last time I had Bitdefender on my pc with Samsung 850 EVO SSD with OS installed felt like I am running a HDD.
Click to expand...
It’s changed quite a bit recently for a lot of users. For me it’s almost identical to ESET. This surprised me. Also it’s much less buggy, but still seems more finicky than some other AVs.
 
  • Like
  • +Reputation
Reactions: Durden, miguelang611, JB007 and 7 others
This is about average. I just got done taking a lunch break and playing a game. It can get near 100MB when idle for a while. It increases a lot with scans, but I don't full/quick scan often (don't see the point with real-time protection).

1588967135093.png


I should note that when I say near identical to ESET I just mean in how snappy the system is. Even when it's running with less memory it's more than ESET, everybody is more than ESET.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daniel Hidalgo, JB007, Dave Russo and 11 others
The Ordynary said:
when you have mcafee with maximum score, you can’t take the test completely seriously, it’s a very bad antivirus.
Click to expand...
This is just a performance test, meaning how much impact an AV has on a system. It's not related to protection.
Besides, McAfee scans files on execution only so it's no surprise to see it with maximum score while something like ESET, Kaspersky, Bitdefender scans files on access, creation, modification, execution so their results are more impressive than McAfee here.
 
  • Like
  • +Reputation
Reactions: Mahesh Sudula, Daniel Hidalgo, JB007 and 12 others
SeriousHoax said:
This is just a performance test, meaning how much impact an AV has on a system. It's not related to protection.
Besides, McAfee scans files on execution only so it's no surprise to see it with maximum score while something like ESET, Kaspersky, Bitdefender scans files on access, creation, modification, execution so their results are more impressive than McAfee here.
Click to expand...
emsisoft also checks when accessing, I believe it would do better, but I still think mcafee is a very bad antivirus in general.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB007 and Dave Russo
The Ordynary said:
emsisoft also checks when accessing, I believe it would do better, but I still think mcafee is a very bad antivirus in general.
Click to expand...
Emsisoft doesn't actually. It's similar to McAfee, on execution only. But you can change the default settings if you want while McAfee doesn't even give you the option which is bad.
 
  • Like
  • +Reputation
Reactions: JB007, Dave Russo, Protomartyr and 5 others
DSD27 said:
The only problem is that it's paid ;)
Still I don't believe it's better.
Click to expand...
Well, got 4-year subscription for sth like $17
I have used both Avast and Bullguard and I can tell you that Bullguard is much lighter and their Game Booster just works. Itwill not do miracles but it will stop unncessary stuff from interrupting you while gaming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB007, Dave Russo, roger_m and 1 other person
The Cog in the Machine said:
Well, got 4-year subscription for sth like $17
I have used both Avast and Bullguard and I can tell you that Bullguard is much lighter and their Game Booster just works. Itwill not do miracles but it will stop unncessary stuff from interrupting you while gaming.
Click to expand...
Lighter for OS I believe it, but for "gaming mode" I don't believe Bullguard is better. Did you use "suspend all non-gaming user processes" from Avast's geek:area? I'm not simply talking about the default setting.

Yeah.. that's how all game boosters work, most of them terminate processes, then when you leave the game, some won't come back properly. Avast only suspends them, so it's better. For me, all game boosters were bs, until I tried Avasts one.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JB007, Dave Russo and stefanos
DSD27 said:
Avast only suspends them, so it's better. For me, all game boosters were bs, until I tried Avasts one.
Click to expand...
It is possible that Avast is using the technology from Tune Up Utilities. Avast is a great product and I do like it but I won't install it at least not now. Bullguard is installed on my Gaming PC and it is running smoothly and does not interrupt me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB007, Dave Russo, roger_m and 2 others
The Cog in the Machine said:
It is possible that Avast is using the technology from Tune Up Utilities. Avast is a great product and I do like it but I won't install it at least not now. Bullguard is installed on my Gaming PC and it is running smoothly and does not interrupt me.
Click to expand...
Since you already spent the money on Bullguard you better keep it 😋
I only pay for two "apps": Netflix and Spotify. All the rest I go for the free options, because nothing else justifies paying for.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • +Reputation
Reactions: JB007, Dave Russo, roger_m and 2 others

You may also like...