New AV Test

[SlashRose 25]

One of the worst results when Eset AV Test, Eset only 7 from behind, no wonder if the Keeps the program nich goes round!

hxxp://www.pcwelt.de/news/Antivirus-Software-fuer-Windows-10-im-Test-9851562.html?utm_source=best-of-pc-welt-manuell&utm_medium=email&uitm_campaign=newsletter&r=964606617093360&lid=466700&pm_ln=11

For what else is still standing, namely to be resource-friendly, so now there is what is going on only when Eset that such a good AV has so deteriorated, and the at any Point! ( German: Eines der schlechtesten Eset Ergebnis beim AV Test, Eset nur 7 von hinten, kein Wunder wenn die Hälte des Programms nicht Rund läuft! For what else is still standing, namely to be resource-friendly, so now there is what is going on only when Eset that such a good AV has so deteriorated, and the at any Point!)

[TomFace 539]

FYI...your link is marked and blocked as a malicious website by MalwareBytes.

 

As far as another AV test, as I have said in the past, (good or bad) it's just a test and not a true reflection of real life.

I will not chase test results.

Edited November 24, 2015 by TomFace

[iFlame 1]

FYI...your link is marked and blocked as a malicious website by MalwareBytes.

Untitled.jpg

As far as another AV test, as I have said in the past, (good or bad) it's just a test and not a true reflection of real life.

I will not chase test results.

The link hxxp://www.pcwelt.de/news/Antivirus-Software-fuer-Windows-10-im-Test-9851562.html?utm_source=best-of-pc-welt-manuell&utm_medium=email&uitm_campaign=newsletter&r=964606617093360&lid=466700&pm_ln=11does not produce any warning from MalwareBytes Premium for me.

[TomFace 539]

That's interesting...now it does not give me a notification...I also use MBAM Prem.

 

Don't know what to tell you as I tried it several times. (unless it was a FP and MBAM updated in the meanwhile).

 

Thanks iFlame.

Edited November 23, 2015 by TomFace

[TJP 143]

Another AV Test - another poor result for the impact score.

 

Protection: 5.5/6.0

Resource: 3.5/6.0

Usability:   6.0/6.0

 

Change the resource usage - an ongoing problem in just the AV Test reviews - to a 5.5 or 6.0 and the results table looks very different.

 

It remains a mystery how a few years ago AV-C gave Eset an award for lowest PC resource usage when in the same period AV-T stated time and again resource usage for Eset products was high. Another mystery is why Eset bother with AV-T or at least why they don't work out why their products continue to record such poor resource usage scores.

[SlashRose 25]

FYI...your link is marked and blocked as a malicious website by MalwareBytes.

Untitled.jpg

As far as another AV test, as I have said in the past, (good or bad) it's just a test and not a true reflection of real life.

I will not chase test results.

 

This is a False Positiv!

[TomFace 539]

Yes, it must have been a FP.

Edited November 24, 2015 by TomFace

[khairulaizat92 9]

Anyway, it is undeniable that yes, eset does do use more resource than before, but it not that bad exactly, even in my Cyber Cafe and PC of my client they still work like a charm. ANyway, it is BAD to just talking about this and that without HELPING in improving this products.

WHat im suggesting is, try your best to help ESET, if there was a bug, try to recreate it and submit the report to eset. That way they can improve themselves. It is not deniable some AV manage to survive by themselves better even without support or a lot or report from their fans, but hey, every software are different anyway. 

 

As for ESET, i believe they had done what they can do, however i believe they will need much more bigger study area to check and test their software performance somehow. And of course, do some appreciation to the customer that support you technically.