altruist

Slows Windows 7/8 64-bit Startup Time

Recommended Posts

Operating System: Windows 8 64-bit

 

Other Operating Systems Tested: Windows 7 64-bit

 

Problem: Windows Startup Time is greatly reduced by Emsisoft Anti-Malware (double to triple my regular startup time)

 

Solutions Tried

  1. Removing Windows Defender
  2. Removing Microsoft Security Essentials
  3. Adding cache.000 dummy file in C:\Program Files (x86)\Emsisoft Anti-Malware\Signatures\BD

 

extra keywords for search: boot up start up startup boot time power on windows 7 windows 8 64-bit x64

 

Details

I've installed (and uninstalled) EAM (Emsisoft Anti-Malware) on both Windows 7 and Windows 8, and both times it increases my boot-up time by at least 30 seconds, and sometimes up to a minute.

 

I've tried reinstalling both operating systems, each time, the system is far faster without EAM installed.

 

On Windows 8, there is no security essentials, it's been replaced by Windows Defender. I've disabled Windows Defender, then proceeded to delete it so it would not run.

 

I've disabled MSE (Microsoft Security Essentials) from running on Windows 7. It does not help.

 

I've also read creating a file called cache.000 in the Signatures/BD directory could help. The file was created by notepad, empty, and saved. 

 

I don't own a SSD, and still use a regular hard drive.

 

I am sure it's EAM, because after I uninstall it, it's instantly faster. I have no other AVs installed. Like I said, the problem occured on a fresh windows install (aside from having Google Chrome installed, and Defender/MSE removed)

 

Other Questions

 

Is there a way I can have emsisoft anti-malware use only the behavioral blocker, and not slow my bootup time? Having the guard not run any of them on bootup doesn't seem to help.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello!

Of course, the system boot speed depends on its configuration.

But the presence in the system of products Emsisoft, of course, slows down the speed! ;)

This I learned when doing a reinstallation of the EAM and OA. :)

My system WITHOUT EAM and OA starts in 22 seconds.
When I installed EAM - download time was 12 seconds longer! (34 seconds).
Then - when installing OA download rate even decreased 14 seconds and was already 49 seconds! <_<
Thus, EAM + OA lengthen boot time ( in my particular case, of course!) as much as 26 seconds!
But this has to accept for the sake of my own safety! :)
 
Nothing superfluous in my autorun no!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was only 12 seconds, I wouldn't mind  :P  Unfortunately it's much more significant than that.

 

I suggest you try uninstalling EAM and OA and see what a difference it makes on your system, then reinstall it later. I think you'd be surprised to see how much it does. I was. I expect antiviruses to slow your system down, but not a modern system to a crawl. 

 

Emsisoft advertises "does not slow down the PC" right on the front page: http://www.emsisoft.com/en/

 

Mamutu in my opinion is the best engine emsisoft has, and it really doesn't slow down your PC. Unfortunately there is no way to use mamutu anymore, as emsisoft is now forcing people to use EAM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my workstation using a SSD drive as well as Windows 8.1 boot time is less then 6 seconds, no matter whether or not EAM is installed. If you are concerned about boot time, you can disable the memory usage optimization (Configuration) as well as disable the File Guard option to "protect the PC even if no user is logged on". In general I suggest to stay away from the BitDefender caching options. They cause a huge amount of disk I/O during the first update that will occur during the boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Fabian!

You propose to remove these checkboxes? I understood correctly?

 

But disable File Guard option to "protect the PC even if no user is logged on" - I guess it's not exactly a good idea. :blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The memory optimization option is correct. The BitDefender caching options aren't available through the GUI. You have to create a certain file for it to enable it (cache.000 in the BD signature directory - don't do it though). The other option ("Protect the PC even if no user is logged on") I was referring to can be found under Guard/File Guard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, Fabian, I don't understand about this last option...(Protect your PC...)

Where ( in EAM settings) does it change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, that's.. :)

I thought so, when I wrote that this is not a good idea!

Does disabling this option does not reduce the security?! :unsure:

I want to say that I am not at all concerned about the fact that EAM & OA will extend the system to boot! :)
Is it critical? ;)
The main thing that my PC is fully protected! Isn't it so? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The option is mostly there for people running EAM on a file server, where files are regularly accessed through file shares for example even though no user is logged in on the system. For a normal home user, it is most likely a complete waste of time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ran a bunch of tests with a boot time benchmark (bootracer).

 

Boot Time with...

 

Emsisoft Completely Uninstalled: 79.921 seconds

Mamutu* Installed: 97.984 seconds

w/EAM Initial Boot: 216.234 seconds

w/EAM Normal boot: 163.453 seconds

w/EAM Tweak1 (not protecting PC with no user logged in): 149.328 seconds

w/EAM Tweak1 with no guard on startup, no memory usage optimization: 145.781 seconds

* Mamutu was not installed during any of the EAM tests.

 

360 Internet Security / Avast AV: 119.031 120.609 seconds

 

So basically, EAM manages to be slower my system down nearly twice as much as a competitor's product (+83 seconds vs +40.688). Disabling 'pre-user logged in' protection only reduces this time by about 14 seconds. 

 

It's also +51.344 seconds vs the original Mamutu. Mamutu was/is definitely a superior product, not impacting your system as much as the competition while providing an almost equal level of protection (in my opinion). 

 

It's not just the boot time, I've also noticed Google Chrome lags whenever you open a new tab with EAM. It's little things like that, which I haven't independently measured, but noticed feels very noticably slower with EAM installed. But that belongs in separate threads.

 

I'm happy to try any other tweaks you can suggest, however unconventional. I like the idea of a Behavioral blocker and it would be really nice to get back that performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the Mamutu boot time looks quite high to be honest. Can you take a look at your task manager after the boot and check if a2service.exe is constantly consuming some CPU power without you actually doing anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the Mamutu boot time looks quite high to be honest. Can you take a look at your task manager after the boot and check if a2service.exe is constantly consuming some CPU power without you actually doing anything?

For Mamutu or EAM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the Mamutu boot time looks quite high to be honest. Can you take a look at your task manager after the boot and check if a2service.exe is constantly consuming some CPU power without you actually doing anything?

 

 

From Task Manager after a clean boot, logged in

 

a2service.exe *32 uses 0% cpu (99% for a few seconds prior), 00:00:13 CPU Time and 197,512K Memory Usage

 

So far it looks like a2service is running fine, as long as I'm not doing anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.