ncage

Level 2
I decided to give SHP a try. I'm trying to git ride of bitdefender and found out SHP is WORSE!!!!. I installed it on 4 different computers and it looks about the same.
memory.png


For those that have tried SHP you know it had a ton of processes so those are just the two that consume the most memory. Wow > 400MB to start out and yes i let it set that a LONG time (> 24 hours) hoping memory would come down...nope. I tried Norton next and after it sits idle for awhile it will consume < 40MB of memory. Guess i'm going to be using Norton....
 

Raiden

Level 13
Verified
Content Creator
I decided to give SHP a try. I'm trying to git ride of bitdefender and found out SHP is WORSE!!!!. I installed it on 4 different computers and it looks about the same. View attachment 217612

For those that have tried SHP you know it had a ton of processes so those are just the two that consume the most memory. Wow > 400MB to start out and yes i let it set that a LONG time (> 24 hours) hoping memory would come down...nope. I tried Norton next and after it sits idle for awhile it will consume < 40MB of memory. Guess i'm going to be using Norton....
Sometimes it takes a while for SHP to settle down, even longer than 24h in some cases. It's memory usage is a little high and I do hope that one day they will cut down on the processes. Aside from that, when I've used SHP I did find it to be fairly light on the system. I've notice a slight lag when logging into Windows and sometimes an ever so slight delay when opening programs for the first time right after system start up, but other than that I don't notice it. Aside from the memory usage, do you find that it slows your system down in anyway? Memory usage can be a hard thing to judge when it comes to performance. TBH, most browsers use way more than that, especially if you have a lot of tabs/extensions. When it comes to performance hits, it tends to come more from CPU and disk I/O usage more than anything IMO. Most computers now a days have more than enough ram to handle these things. Unless you have a system with 4gb, or less, it may have more of an impact, but if you have 8GB+, 400mb really isn't anything.

I'm not trying to convince you to keep SHP, but just realize that memory usage many not always be an indicator of performance.
 
4

436880927

According to Task Manager in the image he shared, the memory usage isn't even 20%... the dude is on the forums complaining about SOPHOS when one of his IM applications - Skype - is over 160MB.

You just can't make it up... ROFLAO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ncage

Level 2
ROFLAO... 400MB is perfectly fine.

The problem isn't SOPHOS. It's you.
Maybe for you :)...400MB from an AV is an absorptive about of memory for an AV. I can load an entire operating system (Arch + Mate) in less memory than that. There are a lot of use cases where memory can be quite constraint and i don't want my AV consuming that much memory.

According to Task Manager in the image he shared, the memory usage isn't even 20%... the dude is on the forums complaining about SOPHOS when one of his IM applications - Skype - is over 160MB.

You just can't make it up... ROFLAO.
Probably because thats just an example. That isn't my personal PC. i would never ever use skype.

Sometimes it takes a while for SHP to settle down, even longer than 24h in some cases. It's memory usage is a little high and I do hope that one day they will cut down on the processes. Aside from that, when I've used SHP I did find it to be fairly light on the system. I've notice a slight lag when logging into Windows and sometimes an ever so slight delay when opening programs for the first time right after system start up, but other than that I don't notice it. Aside from the memory usage, do you find that it slows your system down in anyway? Memory usage can be a hard thing to judge when it comes to performance. TBH, most browsers use way more than that, especially if you have a lot of tabs/extensions. When it comes to performance hits, it tends to come more from CPU and disk I/O usage more than anything IMO. Most computers now a days have more than enough ram to handle these things. Unless you have a system with 4gb, or less, it may have more of an impact, but if you have 8GB+, 400mb really isn't anything.

I'm not trying to convince you to keep SHP, but just realize that memory usage many not always be an indicator of performance.
I'll definitely agree with you on general cpu usage. Pretty agreeable. I guess i'll give it some time and see if it comes down. Ya no other than memory usage i was happy. I understand for most people the memory isn't that big of a deal but for someone who is dealing with density of VMs on a server it or paying for VMs in the cloud (in either azure or amazon) it can be huge.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
4

436880927

Maybe for you :)...400MB from an AV is an absorptive about of memory for an AV. I can load an entire operating system (Arch + Mate) in less memory than that. There are a lot of use cases where memory can be quite constraint and i don't want my AV consuming that much memory.
"Mommy... I want 16GB DDR4 RAM. But I want Windows 10, AV, loads of apps and still have 90% memory left. For absolutely no reason."

You either want...
1. More memory consumption and faster scans.
2. More CPU and disk overhead on a regular basis from swapping the signatures 24/7.
3. Pretty much no local signatures.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Zartarra

Level 1
I use SHP for a couple of months. The memory usage is not that bad. It is around 300 MB. There are AV products that consume less memory. The only issue I have is that some games are slow to start because SHP is scanning the files. It is on my call list for Sophos support.
 

Seyyed Akram

Level 8
Verified
I use SHP for a couple of months. The memory usage is not that bad. It is around 300 MB. There are AV products that consume less memory. The only issue I have is that some games are slow to start because SHP is scanning the files. It is on my call list for Sophos support.
Yes, I had a simlar issue too. It also slowed down Firefox a bit. It delayed Windows startup for a few more seconds. Anyway, SHP is still a new product and I believe they will improve in the next version. The best thing we can do to help improve the product is by reporting bugs, suggesting features and having patience.
 

Raiden

Level 13
Verified
Content Creator
Yes, I had a simlar issue too. It also slowed down Firefox a bit. It delayed Windows startup for a few more seconds. Anyway, SHP is still a new product and I believe they will improve in the next version. The best thing we can do to help improve the product is by reporting bugs, suggesting features and having patience.
I have to admit, it's one of my favorite 3rd party AVs. I think they have improved a lot from V1 to V2, but like you said it's still relatively a new product (consumer wise), so they still have some growing pains to sort out, but I don't think they are far off. A few performance tweaks, better protection against scripting malware, etc... and I think it will be right up there. As it stand now, it's a very capable product IMHO, just need to supplement it with VS, OSA, or Syshardener to take care of the scripting malware and really you have a very simple but effective setup IMHO. (y)
 

blackice

Level 11
Verified
Yes, I had a simlar issue too. It also slowed down Firefox a bit. It delayed Windows startup for a few more seconds. Anyway, SHP is still a new product and I believe they will improve in the next version. The best thing we can do to help improve the product is by reporting bugs, suggesting features and having patience.
The Firefox slowdown was the reason I dropped it. Otherwise it was perfectly fine for me. In fact I’m keeping my eye on it as a solution for managing the family computers in the house. It’s SHP, BD2020, or Microsoft Defender for set and forget for our needs. Just waiting to see how it shakes out.
 

Seyyed Akram

Level 8
Verified
The Firefox slowdown was the reason I dropped it. Otherwise it was perfectly fine for me. In fact I’m keeping my eye on it as a solution for managing the family computers in the house. It’s SHP, BD2020, or Microsoft Defender for set and forget for our needs. Just waiting to see how it shakes out.
The only reason I am not using it right now is their subscription type. I don't need a 10-device subscription.

I have to admit, it's one of my favorite 3rd party AVs. I think they have improved a lot from V1 to V2, but like you said it's still relatively a new product (consumer wise), so they still have some growing pains to sort out, but I don't think they are far off. A few performance tweaks, better protection against scripting malware, etc... and I think it will be right up there. As it stand now, it's a very capable product IMHO, just need to supplement it with VS, OSA, or Syshardener to take care of the scripting malware and really you have a very simple but effective setup IMHO. (y)
Yes I really like SHP and I believe it offers decent protection. I will wait to see their new version.
 

Seyyed Akram

Level 8
Verified
To be fair their 10 device subscription is about the same price as other companies three device subscription.
I have never purchased a security product directly from their store. Would you pay $70 for Kaspersky? I do purchase from other stores and the price normally $19.99
Now SHP is for $34/ year after %40 discount. So the normal price is $60.

ncage question is does SHP slow down your PC? If not, then RAM/CPU usage shoudn't be an issue.
It does slow down a bit but it is worth it.