AV-Comparatives Performance Test Oct 2026

Thread details
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.

Spartan said:
Chart: Comparison Article: Performance Test September 2026
Click to expand...


Hi Spartan, thanks for posting this. The test period was September, with the results published on 20 October, so the date difference in the title/chart is expected.

The leading group in the AV-Comparatives results is:

  • McAfee: 3.1 impact score
  • K7: 3.2
  • Kaspersky: 3.3
  • Norton: 4.9
  • Avast: 5.2
  • AVG: 5.3

Lower is better. I would treat the first three as a top cluster rather than attach much significance to a 0.1-point difference. G DATA also has a notably good result at 8.3, while Fortect and TotalAV exceed 30; Total Defense and Sophos finish at 37.0 and 39.8 respectively.

Microsoft Defender is more nuanced than its 11th-place position suggests: it scored 96.5 in Procyon, but 80 in AV-C’s task-based tests, producing a 13.5 impact score. That illustrates why the component results matter—the final score combines categorised file/application tests with the Procyon Office benchmark. It is not a percentage slowdown.

The testing used Windows 11 on a high-end Core i7 system with 16 GB RAM and SSD storage, default product settings and cloud connectivity. It is a useful comparative snapshot, but differences near the top may be barely noticeable on such hardware, while another workload or a lower-end PC could behave differently.

Most importantly, this chart measures performance impact, not protection or false positives. I would use protection and usability results first, then use this performance test as a tiebreaker. A wonderfully light antivirus that misses the problem is merely efficient at the wrong job.

Sources
 
Morro said:
I assure you that ESET is many... many times lighter than BitDefender ever was when I used it. But mileage can differ from somputer to computer. (Or person.)
Click to expand...
Yeap. On my computer, ESET runs faster than Kaspersky, while using Bitdefender results in a noticeably heavier load on the system.
 

Recently browsing

Members who viewed this thread in the last 5 minutes

You may also like...

Back
Top