Jump to content

ESS v7.0.104.0 performance issues


Recommended Posts

Check out

 

hxxp://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/avc_per_201304_en.pdf

 

Paints a different picture :D

 

out of 100 score Eset comes in at 99.4 for performance , and just a note that all those scores were tested on v6 ......... not the v7 "BETA"

well, thanks

 

but i'm a bit confused that why there's such a big difference.

Edited by skylight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members

To be honest i think the performance related tests on any antivirus or security suite is going to be different on every computer its run on.

 

Over the years i have tried every one and they all have issues of some sort and there will be tradeoffs with them. ESS v 4.0 is by far the fastest version i have ran on my own pc, but maybe others would say that v 5 or 6 are quicker.

 

I have been running v7 since it came out on beta and its been better than its predecessor v6 by a mile for me and just keeping my fingers crossed that on release of the final version that its performance is on par with v4 :wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

If you look at the performance test closer, they state: Use cases: visiting websites, downloading software, installing and running programs and copying data.

That said, it all boils down to what files are used. If large archives or heavily packed files are used, it will take longer to scan them. However, without knowing more details about this particular test, it's impossible to comment on it but generally said, in a real-world scenario ESET is one of the lightest AVs in terms of the system footprint. Also we've been continually working on improving performance of code emulation so that files are emulated by advanced heuristics much faster than ever before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest i think the performance related tests on any antivirus or security suite is going to be different on every computer its run on.

 

Over the years i have tried every one and they all have issues of some sort and there will be tradeoffs with them. ESS v 4.0 is by far the fastest version i have ran on my own pc, but maybe others would say that v 5 or 6 are quicker.

 

I have been running v7 since it came out on beta and its been better than its predecessor v6 by a mile for me and just keeping my fingers crossed that on release of the final version that its performance is on par with v4 :wub:

i do agree with you that V4 is the fastest one i have ever used.and it will be great if v7 is faster than v6 :) .

i think it should be HIPS which mainly affects the performence.

Edited by skylight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the performance test closer, they state: Use cases: visiting websites, downloading software, installing and running programs and copying data.

That said, it all boils down to what files are used. If large archives or heavily packed files are used, it will take longer to scan them. However, without knowing more details about this particular test, it's impossible to comment on it but generally said, in a real-world scenario ESET is one of the lightest AVs in terms of the system footprint. Also we've been continually working on improving performance of code emulation so that files are emulated by advanced heuristics much faster than ever before.

thanks for you detailed explanation.

 

i totally agree with what you've said.

and i just hope you can make it perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 

 

To be honest i think the performance related tests on any antivirus or security suite is going to be different on every computer its run on.

 

Over the years i have tried every one and they all have issues of some sort and there will be tradeoffs with them. ESS v 4.0 is by far the fastest version i have ran on my own pc, but maybe others would say that v 5 or 6 are quicker.

 

I have been running v7 since it came out on beta and its been better than its predecessor v6 by a mile for me and just keeping my fingers crossed that on release of the final version that its performance is on par with v4 :wub:

 

 

 

To be honest i think the performance related tests on any antivirus or security suite is going to be different on every computer its run on.

 

Over the years i have tried every one and they all have issues of some sort and there will be tradeoffs with them. ESS v 4.0 is by far the fastest version i have ran on my own pc, but maybe others would say that v 5 or 6 are quicker.

 

I have been running v7 since it came out on beta and its been better than its predecessor v6 by a mile for me and just keeping my fingers crossed that on release of the final version that its performance is on par with v4 :wub:

i do agree with you that V4 is the fastest one i have ever used.and it will be great if v7 is faster than v6 :) .

i think it should be HIPS which mainly affects the performence.

 

 

What they said regarding v4.

 

Performance has got noticeably worse since then.

 

How on earth does Norton keep coming out of these tests so well?  It has been absolutely dreadful in terms of performance on all machines I have seen it installed on for about 10 years.

 

Very dodgy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members

 

 
 

 

To be honest i think the performance related tests on any antivirus or security suite is going to be different on every computer its run on.

 

Over the years i have tried every one and they all have issues of some sort and there will be tradeoffs with them. ESS v 4.0 is by far the fastest version i have ran on my own pc, but maybe others would say that v 5 or 6 are quicker.

 

I have been running v7 since it came out on beta and its been better than its predecessor v6 by a mile for me and just keeping my fingers crossed that on release of the final version that its performance is on par with v4 :wub:

 

 

 

To be honest i think the performance related tests on any antivirus or security suite is going to be different on every computer its run on.

 

Over the years i have tried every one and they all have issues of some sort and there will be tradeoffs with them. ESS v 4.0 is by far the fastest version i have ran on my own pc, but maybe others would say that v 5 or 6 are quicker.

 

I have been running v7 since it came out on beta and its been better than its predecessor v6 by a mile for me and just keeping my fingers crossed that on release of the final version that its performance is on par with v4 :wub:

i do agree with you that V4 is the fastest one i have ever used.and it will be great if v7 is faster than v6 :) .

i think it should be HIPS which mainly affects the performence.

 

 

What they said regarding v4.

 

Performance has got noticeably worse since then.

 

How on earth does Norton keep coming out of these tests so well?  It has been absolutely dreadful in terms of performance on all machines I have seen it installed on for about 10 years.

 

Very dodgy.

 

 

Too true Nick , with regards to the Norton comment as its always been terrible :lol: . I think Norton ranks high as its supplied pre installed in a lot of pre built pc's and people have no idea as to how fast and stable their pc can be without it.

 

I remember back when Mcafee got the same superb ratings too lol  ^_^ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

 

this is a resent test report by AV-Test

hxxp://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/mayjun-2013/

 

I think you really need to do sth to improve the performance :( .

Personally I never pay much attention to the tests by AV-Test as they never seem to mirror what I feel on my PC when I use ESET in terms of performance or level of protection it offers for that matter. And this performance test is no exception unfortunately. But I still look at the tests done by all testing orgs though, but I always do it with a huge can of salt, and that goes for all tests not only tests by AV-Test. But also remember that they are just tests and tests can't show real-world usage wich is most important but impossible to make tests on, obviously.

 

Speaking of testing, I much more prefer the tests done by AV-Comparatives over any test done by AV-Test. See this link for a recent performance test by AV-C: hxxp://www.av-comparatives.org/performance-test-av-may-2013/

 

In any case don't forget that can of salt next time you're looking at test results.

 

HTH :)

Edited by SweX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...