ItsKrom 0 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 When running benchmarks on my 960 pro with internet security 11.0.159.5 enabled the performance is drastically reduced?. Paused protection = 2,224Mb/s read and 1,970 write. Enabled protection = 598Mb/s read and 1,122 write. I searched the forum for others with this issue and found a post from 2016 that was closed, people also reporting this loss of speed using SSD with Eset. In the post you hint at it being only the benchmarker being to fault. can someone tell me if this is true. Samsung magician latest version. thanks for your time in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItsKrom 0 Posted February 8, 2018 Author Share Posted February 8, 2018 Can No-one help? At this rate I'll Just change the software, I've tried everything I can and still with realtime protection off my ssd m.2 960pro performs as it should, with the realtime protection on its drasitcally slower, it;s as simple as pausing the protection and boom the ssd works fine?, anyone?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
novice 20 Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 Why don't you try some other antivirus in trial mode, and see how it behaves? Maybe is common fact.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itman 1,740 Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 The latest A-V Comparatives Performance test here: https://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/avc_per_201710_en.pdf which used SSD ranked Eset IS 11 the third highest tested AV product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Spartan 56 Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 (edited) I have two Samsung 960 PRO 2TB SSDs in RAID 0 Here are my tests With the AV Enabled: With the AV Disabled Yes there is a difference but it's very small not like how bad as you mentioned. Edited February 9, 2018 by Phoenix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Most Valued Members cyberhash 194 Posted February 9, 2018 Most Valued Members Share Posted February 9, 2018 @ItsKrom , there are lots of different things that could affect the outcomes of your benchmarks . Are you running any OTHER security product alongside your Eset product, there are plenty of products on the market that can cause issues like this. A bit Like @Phoenix benchmarks above , my results are even less negligible. Left side is with protection on, right side is with it off ................ Not even noticeable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Most Valued Members peteyt 395 Posted February 9, 2018 Most Valued Members Share Posted February 9, 2018 On 02/02/2018 at 6:01 PM, ItsKrom said: When running benchmarks on my 960 pro with internet security 11.0.159.5 enabled the performance is drastically reduced?. Paused protection = 2,224Mb/s read and 1,970 write. Enabled protection = 598Mb/s read and 1,122 write. I searched the forum for others with this issue and found a post from 2016 that was closed, people also reporting this loss of speed using SSD with Eset. In the post you hint at it being only the benchmarker being to fault. can someone tell me if this is true. Samsung magician latest version. thanks for your time in advance. Best thing might be to open a support ticket. They will probably need logs to. As others have mentioned are you running any other security products alongside eset? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESET Moderators Peter Randziak 1,158 Posted February 9, 2018 ESET Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2018 Hello guys, if I remember correctly we already had some "issues" with the disk benchmark tools. Synthetic tests usually use non-cached reads and in real life you use cached reads, mixing those type of requests might lead to poor results See for example https://forum.eset.com/topic/7072-nod32-90318-slows-down-samsung-pro950-per-magician-benchmark/?do=findComment&comment=39538 So to sum it up you might see a poor synthetic results data, but real life usage experience should not be affected. Regards, P.R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Marcos 5,231 Posted February 9, 2018 Administrators Share Posted February 9, 2018 That's correct. We have a fix on a to-do list, in particular to make a specific operation perform differently which will affect Samsung Magician and maybe other benchmark test with virtually no influence on real-life usage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItsKrom 0 Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 I would like to thank everyone for helping me with this issue, it would seem Samsung Magician isn't very magical at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts