Nice performance with NOD32 v10

[Super_Spartan 56]

Finally, you have managed to bring back the days of the light NOD32 v2, look at the benchmarks of before and after. Mind you, in wPRIME, the lower the time, the better, but that is a very small fraction of a second hit whereas with other AVs the hit is higher at around an increase of 0.5 to 1.5 seconds on the time needed by wPRIME to run the test

 

 

 

 

Edited April 25, 2016 by Phoenix

[Marcos 5,274]

I think this is caused by a small change that affected only benchmarks, not real-world use.

[Super_Spartan 56]

I think this is caused by a small change that affected only benchmarks, not real-world use.

if you notice my sig, I have the 950 Pro. Remember that user who complained about slow performance with the 950 Pro?

 

https://forum.eset.com/topic/7072-nod32-90318-slows-down-samsung-pro950-per-magician-benchmark/

 

Never experienced that but it's working perfectly with NOD32 v10

 

I submitted a recommendation to the ESET Team:

 

 

 

Please allow multiple location exclusions like in Avast Antivirus. I don\'t want to go to C:\\Program Files again and again to add different program folders one by one that I want to be excluded. Can you please make the exclusions interface a checkbox list so we can select multiple locations simultaneously? 

[21jags 0]

yes  there was issue with earlier version (Specially with samsung magician)

 

I had received a reply from ESET

"The issue seems to be in mixing of cached and non-cached reads on a file. SSD benchmark does non-cached reads whereas we do cached read(s). Once there was at least one cached read on a file, subsequent non-cached reads need to flush/purge cache which adds some small overhead on every read. If there is fair amount of reads, this small overhead can become significant."