ESET v7 - a resource hog

[SweX 871]

SweX, from the posts you I see you make here, I cannot trust a single word you say. Because you blindly defend ESET.

Defended ESET?

 

This is not even about ESET, it's about the product and how it works on our systems. Or not works for some of you.

 

I defended the product because as so many times in the past the results is not near what I feel (or not feel) when I use ESET. 

 

I am an ESET user since the days of V2, so I am in no way a troll, or trying to bash them. I just want someone to fix these performance issues that I have experienced and pointed out here.

No troll? Then work with ESET and let them them try to fix the performance issues "you" have instead of creating ->  resource hog thread 1, -> resource hog thread 2! I would contact ESET and work with them in no time if I had a performance issue.

 

 

Thirdly, another example, I have a program called "PhotoZoom Pro". The setup files are 27 MB in size, very small..when I install it and have Webroot installed, the installation finishes in exactly 1 second and bamm. it's done!

 

when I have NOD32 installed, it hangs for 2 seconds when you hit NEXT, then you see it installed. so there IS a slow down noone can dispute that

Could that be because the product is actually checking the file in realtime and perhaps even makes a cloud-lookup. It all depends on what the product is set to do in a cases like "on execution" as that is a critical moment. To me that is not a performance issue, it would be an "issue" though if your PC was slow while using the program that you installed because of ESET. A 1-2 sec delay during install  is no biggie in my book.

 

data copying from my HDD to my external HDD was hurt big time with NOD32 installed but with Webroot, the tranfers to my USB 3.0 WD HDD happen at super fast (Webroot 100 MB/S, ESET >> 10 MB/S) and I did post the thread here earlier and was told that NOD32 doesn't scan the file while it is copying, but the fact is, at the end of the day, my transfer speeds were lower by 90%

Again, work with ESET.

 

Your argument about how the tests show bad results but noone here complaints has no value. Many people aren't too picky about performance like me, or don't know how fast was their system before/after NOD32, they just want an AV that works. I commend ESET for making such a stable product with 0 FPs as I for one had to conatct Webroot 4 times to whitelist some files but they do it in less than 30 mins which is good. Still, ESET wins here with no FPs and headacheless operation. It's just that performance bit. Give meh NOD32 v2 comaptible with Windows 8.1 and I'm a happy man

But I am picky, very picky indeed. If ESET would slow me down, while computing, browsing.... I wouldn't use ESET. And I certainly wouldn't recommend ESET to others! But what I and other ESET users say has no value, apparently. "but no one complaints" of course no one complaints if they are happy with the product. Should people only post negative product experiences on here or what.

 

And no, I would not use Bitdefender AV, McAfee, or Kaspersky based on those tests because I know while they have no negative impact on file transfer operations and the speeds are full. they do affect internet browsing/downloading heavily due to the way they due HTTP scans.

 

They all own ESET on performance in the latest AV-Test. AV-Test results reveal that they are very fast products. 

 

So, you believe the AV-Test results when they say that ESET is slower on system performance.

 

But you do not believe the AV-Test results when they say that 4 other products has better system performance than ESET.  

 

I will give NOD32 one last try, I am reverting back to an image I had made before installing an AV, and will install NOD32, then will work with the mods here to see how can they help me with my slow USB 3.0 transfer speeds.

 

That's good news you should have done that ages ago!

[Marcos 5,070]

We appreciate that Tweak Arena has decided to give ESET one more try and is willing to co-operate with troubleshooting his issue. No personal offense please

[SweX 871]

We appreciate that Tweak Arena has decided to give ESET one more try and is willing to co-operate with troubleshooting his issue. No personal offense please

Personal offense? It's more of a product Good vs Bad offense I would say. But fine, next time I will consider to keep my positive ESET experience for myself. And let the negativity run free 

[Arakasi 549]

 

We appreciate that Tweak Arena has decided to give ESET one more try and is willing to co-operate with troubleshooting his issue. No personal offense please

Personal offense? It's more of a product Good vs Bad offense I would say. But fine, next time I will consider to keep my positive ESET experience for myself. And let the negativity run free 

 

 

I think he means no further offense towards Tweak because, everyone is now neutral by default until the troubleshooting and performance issue evaluation between vendor and client is completed through to resolution. 

[SweX 871]

 

 

We appreciate that Tweak Arena has decided to give ESET one more try and is willing to co-operate with troubleshooting his issue. No personal offense please

Personal offense? It's more of a product Good vs Bad offense I would say. But fine, next time I will consider to keep my positive ESET experience for myself. And let the negativity run free 

 

 

I think he means no further offense towards Tweak because, everyone is now neutral by default until the troubleshooting and performance issue evaluation between vendor and client is completed through to resolution. 

 

IMO, We had a discussion nothing more nothing less, discussions tend to start when people have different opinions. And it's not the first time a resource hog thread is created by said member, it's the same story over and over, see this test, see that test. Instead of taking the help when first offered by ESET, he went to Webroot, and now he's back just like that saying...see this test ESET is a resource hog.

 

The thing is that I really don't see the point in having the same discussion with the same member for the second time with just a couple of months in between the threads. 

 

Marcos replied...

"Unfortunately, you refused to troubleshoot your issue so we were not given a chance to find out what was actually causing the performance drag in your case. I simply don't find it fair that you keep complaining here after you've already moved to another product and all our users are more than happy with v7 performance."

 

And Marcos could have closed the thread with that post and left a link to an earlier thread on the same topic by the same member: https://forum.eset.com/topic/1760-proof-that-nod32-v7-is-a-resource-hog/

But now we have two threads and two discussions on the same topic "resource hog"

Edited November 9, 2014 by SweX

[Nedim 9]

Calm down folks, let him try ESET again.

I'm pretty sure that all his issues will be resolved if he decides to co-operate with us and ESET.

[SweX 871]

I imagine you are not running 64 bit windows 8, or you may have noticed Windows explorer is running 300/ 500 meg and you browsers crawl.

Stick with what works on your system.

I have ywo year webroot license I cannot use.

That's computers, I don't think Microsoft make it easy for anyone these days, but that's just my thoughts.

Yes, I believe Webroot is working on that issue so it will be fixed sooner or later. But you are free to stay with ESET if you want too of course.

[Wrogg 5]

 

I imagine you are not running 64 bit windows 8, or you may have noticed Windows explorer is running 300/ 500 meg and you browsers crawl.

Stick with what works on your system.

I have ywo year webroot license I cannot use.

That's computers, I don't think Microsoft make it easy for anyone these days, but that's just my thoughts.

Yes, I believe Webroot is working on that issue so it will be fixed sooner or later. But you are free to stay with ESET if you want too of course.

 

I aim to. reference the screen shots that say this problem doesn't exist. Well it doesn't if you stop explorer then Webroot then restart. It will be fine until the next reboot. Someone already claimed my remaining license as many other problems with Chrome which I use as it sync's with my Nexus. So I will stay with Eset and if I get problems I will use defender. 

It's anti virus that work out at pennies a day, I don't really think it's anything to get over emotional about.

[Super_Spartan 56]

Strange guys, tested my transfer speed before copying a 30 GB Macrium Reflect Image file fro mthe HDD to the External WD 3.0 USB HDd and I had 97 MB/S transfer speed

 

Installed NOD32, updated, rebooted

 

then tested the transfer speed, it was a stable 98 MB/S

 

Maybe in the past when I Was doing these tests the scores were diff. since I have updated my drivers almost all of them since then

 

I'm glad I am back to NOD32

[SweX 871]

since I have updated my drivers almost all of them since then

 

I'm glad I am back to NOD32

Blame it on the boogie.

[SweX 871]

 

 

I imagine you are not running 64 bit windows 8, or you may have noticed Windows explorer is running 300/ 500 meg and you browsers crawl.

Stick with what works on your system.

I have ywo year webroot license I cannot use.

That's computers, I don't think Microsoft make it easy for anyone these days, but that's just my thoughts.

Yes, I believe Webroot is working on that issue so it will be fixed sooner or later. But you are free to stay with ESET if you want too of course.

 

 So I will stay with Eset and if I get problems I will use defender. 

 

Ok, but please no not defender If for some reason you get a problem then just start a thread and explain the problem as good as you can and it'll hopefully be sorted out as quickly as possible. 

Edited March 27, 2014 by SweX

[Marcos 5,070]

Maybe in the past when I Was doing these tests the scores were diff. since I have updated my drivers almost all of them since then

Perhaps we should recommend the tester to update the drivers, too Unfortunately, the methodology used in the performance test is not known to my best knowledge but the fact that probably nobody else has experienced noticeable performance impact with v7 shows that there must be something wrong or the test doesn't simulate how people use computers in real-world.

[Arakasi 549]

Would also add that Slim drivers is the best utility by far i have found that will go out there and find the correct and most up-to-date driver available. 98% effective, sometimes it will pull a previous driver.

It will find your chipset drivers, hd controller drivers, sata drivers, video and sound drivers. Any third party hardware you plug into expansion slots, or usb ports etc.

Do not download and use the full version. The slim is by far superior, only 1 device at a time. It also has an AVG toolbar pua, so deselect that option when installing.

[SweX 871]

It also has an AVG toolbar pua, so deselect that option when installing.

Is it detected by ESET if we got PUA detections enabled? Just curious 

[Super_Spartan 56]

 

Maybe in the past when I Was doing these tests the scores were diff. since I have updated my drivers almost all of them since then

Perhaps we should recommend the tester to update the drivers, too Unfortunately, the methodology used in the performance test is not known to my best knowledge but the fact that probably nobody else has experienced noticeable performance impact with v7 shows that there must be something wrong or the test doesn't simulate how people use computers in real-world.

 

I can confirm, NOD32 has 0 slowdown now. Guess the old drivers were playing in a weird way with NOD32 but whatever, now my system is the same before/after installing NOD32!

 

thanks guys for being patient with me despite my numerous bashful threads.

[Arakasi 549]

 

It also has an AVG toolbar pua, so deselect that option when installing.

Is it detected by ESET if we got PUA detections enabled? Just curious 

 

 

The way its embedded, i think it is NOT detected by ESET. However i use Endpoint at work, and Home versions elsewhere. Would need to try downloading it at home.

It may be P unsafe A ?

[SweX 871]

Post a direct download to the very build having the AVG Toolbar in it, and I will try to download it but hopefully I will not be able too

[Arakasi 549]

hXXp://www.driverupdate.net/downloads/SlimDrivers-setup. exe

Edited March 27, 2014 by Arakasi

[SweX 871]

hXXp://www.driverupdate.net/downloads/SlimDrivers-setup. exe

Thanks Dutch man. Nope not a beep. 

 

Edit: I've never seen that a quoted link automatically changes to hXXp:// before now.

Edited March 27, 2014 by SweX

[Arakasi 549]

 

hXXp://www.driverupdate.net/downloads/SlimDrivers-setup. exe

Thanks Dutch man. Nope not a beep. 

 

Edit: I've never seen that a quoted link automatically changes to hXXp:// before now.

 

 

I made it hxxp purposefully to ensure passer-by don't download without creating the link manually. (Happy clickers)

It does have PUA embedded, and it is not detected by ESET software at all.

Edited March 27, 2014 by Arakasi

[SweX 871]

 

 

hXXp://www.driverupdate.net/downloads/SlimDrivers-setup. exe

Thanks Dutch man. Nope not a beep. 

 

Edit: I've never seen that a quoted link automatically changes to hXXp:// before now.

 

 

I made it hxxp purposefully to ensure passer-by don't download without creating the link manually. (Happy clickers)

It does have PUA embedded, and it is not ESET software at all.

 

Then I really must have clicked on it before you edited your post, because I didn't need to edit the link in any way it was "blue" and clickable. In any case it's good that you did that as you never know when a Happy Clicker drives by. I just thought the admin had changed something in the forum software wich made it change automatically that's all.

 

What do you mean with (and it is not ESET software at all? I guess you mean it's not detected by ESET software at all? 

Edited March 27, 2014 by SweX

[Arakasi 549]

 

 

 

hXXp://www.driverupdate.net/downloads/SlimDrivers-setup. exe

Thanks Dutch man. Nope not a beep. 

 

Edit: I've never seen that a quoted link automatically changes to hXXp:// before now.

 

 

I made it hxxp purposefully to ensure passer-by don't download without creating the link manually. (Happy clickers)

It does have PUA embedded, and it is not ESET software at all.

 

Then I really must have clicked on it before you edited your post, because I didn't need to edit the link in any way it was "blue" and clickable. In any case it's good that you did that as you never know when a Happy Clicker drives by. I just thought the admin had changed something in the forum software wich made it change automatically that's all.

 

What do you mean with (and it is not ESET software at all? I guess you mean it's not detected by ESET software at all? 

 

 

 

Correct !

[SweX 871]

 

 

What do you mean with (and it is not ESET software at all? I guess you mean it's not detected by ESET software at all? 

 

 

Correct !

And what do we do about that then? 

[Arakasi 549]

samples[at]eset.com

 

Edited March 27, 2014 by Arakasi

[SweX 871]

samples[at]eset.com

 

You do it, i'm going back to bed now. ..."sweet dreams are made of this..."

Edited November 9, 2014 by SweX