Impact of security software on system performance investigated

[HEXUS]

AVG, Avast, Panda, McAfee and more have been tested by AV Comparatives.

Read more.

[Luke7]

Makes me glad I've used Avast for the past 3 years (for free too). Though my low powered chromebook (compared to my R9 280x equipped pc) is much faster when it comes to web browsing. If windows didn't dominate the games industry they'd be dead.

[v0j4]

huh, just yesterday I dropped my free version of avast and went back to windows defender 'cause it seemed like avast was bogging down my laptop performance. after seeing this, i don't know what to think... i'll wait a few days before deciding if i should switch back again.

[OilSheikh]

I bet they didn't bother testing Norton as it would have scared the jewels out of them!

[crossy]

Security software of one kind or another is widely regarded as a necessary evil for PC users. I remember, back in the 90s, trying out various AV solutions that had a terrible impact on my PC's performance.

Linux+ClamAV - don't even notice it's there. Actually the only security software that does make it's presence felt are the various browser plugins (like ABP) that I use.

(Yes, I know it's a cheap shot, but I don't feel up to anything more strenuous at the moment).

[spacein_vader]

If windows didn't dominate the games industry they'd be dead.

I think you misspelt "corporate enterprise".

[jag272]

I bet they didn't bother testing Norton as it would have scared the jewels out of them!

I mentioned this to my friend as soon as I saw this article. They're not included in any of their other tests either other than the Enterprise tests in which Norton scores top marks (As they actually have to keep their enterprise version resonable rather than a bloated pile of junk the general consumer version is).

But ye, wouldve been nice to include Norton, I suspect it would have messed up the scale of the results too much however, akin to making the rest of the results a lovely field and then Norton becoming Mt.Everest.

[LSG501]

I stopped using kaspersky (had it free from bank) because that bogged my system down and went back to windows defender...

Might give avast a try before reinstalling but can't see a reason to change my usual approach (common sense) if I'm honest.

[satrow]

The system under test was an HP branded PC...

They missed a trick there, should have detailed how much HP's crapware Windows version hits performance compared to the Retail version of Windows that they tested with.

[aniilv]

huh, just yesterday I dropped my free version of avast and went back to windows defender 'cause it seemed like avast was bogging down my laptop performance. after seeing this, i don't know what to think... i'll wait a few days before deciding if i should switch back again.

windows defender is pretty useless

I also thought its "good enough" until saw random window opening on top of screen that was changing home pages on browsers... was quicker to just kill the .exe via task manager, defender didn't even notice anything was weird even after full scan.. installed avast - cleaned all that crap out

im still using defender tho but only because i cant disable it on windows 10 because its mandatory there -_-

[MrNeil]

No Comodo ?
Used them for years and never had a problems with virus or malmare ! Not even system hogging ..

Quick Heal and ThreatTrack !! Never heard of these guys .

[GuidoLS]

I've found that a combination of Defender/MSE, Malwarebytes and common sense have worked very well for me.
AVG has memory leaks, and the nags are annoying and obtrusive - something that never gets mentioned.
Kaspersky is way too invasive on too many fronts. And while it *may* be tinfoil hat territory, there are some political issues there.
Norton Enterprise is decent - Norton Home and McAfee make me want to poke hot needles in someone's eye...
Never thought much of Avira. It's not bad - it's just meh - or was, anyway.

And I'm going to presume that a professional outfit removed all the HP bloatware, but even if they didn't, that would probably be a good thing. Real world demonstrations on real world machines.

[[DW]Cougho]

I have used Avast in the past and it was fine, but I didn't think it was particularly lightweight. I've been running Bitdefender free for years now and I love it, I mainly switched due to it consistently topping the charts on another AV league table. Windows defender seems generally awful, and I don't like Panda either - as I run that on my works laptop.

As said above though, realistically any of the main players plus an occasional run of Malwarebytes seems to do the trick for me, but nothing can replace common sense.

[kalniel]

Do check out the detection rate reports for the softwares as well - system impact is but one factor and for an overpowered gaming machine probably the least important. Avira does especially well in those tests, AVAST not bad either, but both have quite high false positive rates (AVAST especially).

I'm quite happy with Avira - the daily nag pop up is potentially too annoying for some, I'm OK with it. It did think RaceRoomExperience on Steam was a virus though and the O2 broadband installer was potentially unwanted - how it knew I'd swapped providers I'll never know

[Lil-Diabo]

I remember using ESET for a while, long ago, but that's it - I just don't run any AV programs.
Unless you count windows Defender.

[kalniel]

I remember using ESET for a while, long ago, but that's it - I just don't run any AV programs.
Unless you count windows Defender.

According to the results, no it shouldn't probably be counted.