Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

jetspeedz

Eset 7 Jumbo Frames + System footprint v4, 5, 6, 7

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone, curious if jumbo frame support is finally implemented in ESET smart security 7? I know it is not supported on v4 which is what I run now and I never upgraded to 5 or 6 b/c I had no use for those features.

Also if anyone knows the footprint of 7 on system resources compared to older versions that would be great. v4 is very light and even though it does not have HIPS so far it has sreved very well on all my systems.

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

1, jumbo frames were first supported by v5

2, v7 should be even lighter in terms of system footprint thanks to LiveGrid. It also contains many improvements to keep the computer protected against new borne threats. That said, we strongly advise upgrading to the latest v7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does LiveGrid help reduce the system footprint of the application itself? I understand this is similar to threatsense on v4 by sending information back to ESET but in terms of the application itself how much memory does it use in the background?

 

Jumbo frame support is good enough reason to upgrade but if the application is resource heavy it outweights the benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,  :)

 

Re RAM usage I will quote myself on that. 

 

------------------

""

ESET loads all signatures and modules into the RAM to increase the system performance, wich results in lower CPU usage and lower HDD I/O activity to make the system more responsive(faster), since the RAM is faster than the HDD it's better to use the RAM than reading to/from the harddrive all the time(more or less), and it's been this way since V3 (at least) when I started to use ESET. It results in a higher RAM usage, but also a faster product, and a faster system.  

And this isn't a bad thing at all IMO. After all I use ESET on an old PC with 512MB of RAM.    

 

What I am saying is basically, that a product that only uses 5-10MB of RAM could still feel heavier on the system and could cause more slowdowns than for example ESET.  

 

The bottom line is, one should not measure how light/heavy a product is based on the RAM usage only  "".

------------------

 

FYI, the RAM usage is around 100MB of RAM.

 

Regarding LiveGrid and other features then I would recommend to read each section here it should give some answers: hxxp://www.eset.com/int/about/technology/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That still did not answer my question about how LiveGrid makes v7 lighter on system resources compared to v4,5,6?

 

With regards to RAM, I agree, i don't simply measure the RAM usage as the end off of a good virus/spyware protection software. I have tested everything out there and there is a reason I stick to ESET and believe me when I say it is not the lightest when it comes to simply "RAM" or CPU usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That still did not answer my question about how LiveGrid makes v7 lighter on system resources compared to v4,5,6?

 

With regards to RAM, I agree, i don't simply measure the RAM usage as the end off of a good virus/spyware protection software. I have tested everything out there and there is a reason I stick to ESET and believe me when I say it is not the lightest when it comes to simply "RAM" or CPU usage.

 

No? I guess one can say that less CPU is used when less things needs to be scanned. So LiveGrid kind of helps the system performance too I would say.

 

From the link I posted....

 

""Moreover, it implements a reputation system that helps to improve the overall efficiency of our anti-malware solutions. When an executable file or archive is being inspected on user’s system, its hash tag is first compared against a database of white- and blacklisted items. 

 

If it is found on the whitelist, the inspected file is considered clean and also flagged to be excluded from future scans. If it is on the blacklist, appropriate actions are taken – based on the nature of the threat.

 

Only if no match was found, the file is scanned thoroughly. Based on results of this scan the file becomes a candidate to extend the corresponding list. This approach has a significant positive impact on scanning performance.""

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That still did not answer my question about how LiveGrid makes v7 lighter on system resources compared to v4,5,6?

 

With regards to RAM, I agree, i don't simply measure the RAM usage as the end off of a good virus/spyware protection software. I have tested everything out there and there is a reason I stick to ESET and believe me when I say it is not the lightest when it comes to simply "RAM" or CPU usage.

 

No? I guess one can say that less CPU is used when less things needs to be scanned. So LiveGrid kind of helps the system performance too I would say.

 

 

 

The point it LiveGrid is no different than Threatsense, how does it actually reduces system footprint compared to an older version when the application is at idle.

 

Now you are taking about the application when it is scanning, sure if it has less threats to scan based on LiveGrid/Threatsense information gathered than it will be faster but Threatsense does the same thing and the same updates get download by any version which is a moot point, the question still remains to be answered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I beg to differ, the root of these two is to send information back to ESET to help provide better system updates which determine what files are Scanned or omitted. Again the question is not answered specifically how it reduces system footprint!

 

 

"Built on ThreatSense.NET® advanced early warning system, ESET LiveGrid® utilizes data that ESET users have submitted worldwide and sends it to ESET's Virus Lab. ESET Virus Lab specialists then use the information to build an accurate snapshot of the nature and scope of global threats in order to release relevant updates to our virus signature database, keeping ESET adaptive to the latest threats."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

System footprint is size on disk . . .

 

1 is used to send TO eset, info about threats.

 

1 is used to collect data and simplify / reduce / consolidate etc database and info send FROM eset to you.

 

This is what i have gathered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LiveGrid's purpose is not to reduce the resource usage in the way I think you mean.  :)

 

At idle the RAM usage by ekrn.exe is approx 100MB (it always is by the way) for the very reason I said in my first post, and the CPU usage is 0%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I beg to differ, the root of these two is to send information back to ESET to help provide better system updates which determine what files are Scanned or omitted.

No, not only.  One can also get real-time cloud detections from LiveGrid like when you execute a file.

Like "Blocked object" , "Suspicious object" etc...  :)

 

So LiveGrid can come into play in real-time as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The response from Marcos was:

 

2, v7 should be even lighter in terms of system footprint thanks to LiveGrid.

 

So far there has been zero explaination to the claim. What I have seen is a bad comparision of LiveGrid to Threatsense which I explained above is a moot point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I beg to differ, the root of these two is to send information back to ESET to help provide better system updates which determine what files are Scanned or omitted.

No, not only.  One can also get real-time cloud detections from LiveGrid like when you execute a file.

Like "Blocked object" , "Suspicious object" etc...  :)

 

So LiveGrid can come into play in real-time as well.

 

 

What does real-time cloud detection have to do with the claim made by Marcos? If a system is segregated to the cloud again this becomes a moot point. In one respect evertime an executable is executed internet bandwith and a delay is accounted for to check against a cloud for the file hash. The delay and tradeoff between protection is a whole different topic on its own. Please stay focused!

 

"2, v7 should be even lighter in terms of system footprint thanks to LiveGrid."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I may ask, why are you only focusing on LiveGrid, is that all you are interested in? There is actually more useful features in the product. LiveGrid is not the only reason to upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm beginning to wonder the same thing about the responses? Comparisons of LiveGrid and Threatsense have been made inaccurately which I pointed out above, yet the claim made still has not been specifically answered.

 

I'm the least bit interested in LiveGrid/Threatsense! I'm however interested in the claim made by the Marcos with respect to system footprint. It appears to me there is no clear answer b/c the claim is false. As i explained the same system updates used by v4,5,6,7 come from analysis sent to ESET by LiveGrid & Threatsense, so how is it that LiveGrid makes v7 of Eset lighter in terms of system footprint?

 

 

"2, v7 should be even lighter in terms of system footprint thanks to LiveGrid."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok we let Marcos explain what he meant.

 

I would have used different words than those myself.

 

I'm beginning to wonder the same thing about the responses?

 

Well if you ask questions about LiveGrid then it would be weird if I give an answer about something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going on a limb here to say he meant something else but time will tell :)

 

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I "think" he meant something similar what we have told you about LiveGrid, but he just said it in another way that's all.

 

But we can let the man talk for himself and clarify.  :D

 

Cheers  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Versions older than v5 use ThreatSense which evolved to LiveGrid first incorporated in v5. One of the main differences is that LiveGrid keeps a local database with cloud information about files and thus can improve performance by safely skipping whitelisted (e.g. popular) files.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it sounds like it evolved to be more !! Even better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Versions older than v5 use ThreatSense which evolved to LiveGrid first incorporated in v5. One of the main differences is that LiveGrid keeps a local database with cloud information about files and thus can improve performance by safely skipping whitelisted (e.g. popular) files.

 

So like i suspected it does not directly affect system footprint, but rather help in improving scan times using "Cloud-powered scanning" when enabled.

From what I have gathered the cpu/ram usage is the same between the different versions. The jumbo frame support is something I will test when I upgrade.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Versions older than v5 use ThreatSense which evolved to LiveGrid first incorporated in v5. One of the main differences is that LiveGrid keeps a local database with cloud information about files and thus can improve performance by safely skipping whitelisted (e.g. popular) files.

From what I have gathered the cpu/ram usage is the same between the different versions. 

 

Cheers

Just to let you know, the RAM usage with V4 was around 70-80MB, and now with V7 it's around 100MB. So almost the same yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, on my systems win 7 x64 and x86 they are about 16MB after boot and slow climb up never exceeding 68MB. I'll test v7 with jumbo frames and if there are no firewall issues with it i'll do some memory and cpu analysis and post back here.

 

thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...