this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2024
2 points (51.3% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54539 readers
174 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Microsoft Defender is good and free, but it is heavier on system resources than any reputable AV. Kasperskey is near the top for least impact on system performance.
Interesting. Do you have links that support your claims that I can read up on?
https://www.av-comparatives.org/comparison/
That chart doesn't say anything about system resource usage.
Edit: found the performance chart now. Still no explanation on what performance tests(more than two sentences) they performed and how the scoring was applied.
https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/performance-test-october-2023/
TBH, that still looks good for MS. It suffered a little with compressed archives (mediocre), installation was "fast," and the rest were "very fast." Certainly not as perfect as some, but unless you're doing lots of installs and working with compressed files, I bet nobody would even notice this difference in real world use cases.
The only place I notice Defender is on an old system (10 years) that's had a billion changes - App installs/uninstalls, etc.
With a 4TB data drive, and a C drive that's 90% full. Poor machine has been abused.
Don't notice any issues on other machines, even when using 7zip on 100 gig archives.