Slow Performance

Hi,

I like Comodo Firewall, but I’m finding the performance to be poor. Below is an example:

From Internet Explorer, go to images.google.com and search on “test”.
With Comodo Firewall set at “Computer Security Level” = Allow All, time to load page = 2 seconds
With Comodo Firewall set at “Computer Security Level” = Custom, time to load page = 16 seconds

The google search results have 20 little images, and so the 16 seconds above means about 1 second for each image. I have fast cable Internet, but this performance feels more like dial-up.

Any suggestions? I had a different firewall before this and didn’t have the performance problems.

Here’s what I’m running:
Internet connection = cable modem
Windows XP SP2
Comodo Firewall 2.3.6.81
Internet Explorer 6.0.2900.2180
McAfee Antivirus
Spy Sweeper
WebWasher
(I’m not running another firewall)

I haven’t changed many settings since I installed it. A printscreen of my Application monitor is attached. I’ve got component monitor in Learn Mode and it has about 500 components listed, all of which were added by Comodo.

Thanks!

[attachment deleted by admin]

I just tried the same search as you tried and it took less than 3 seconds. I am using CPF 2.3.6.81 with 30 rules and all options turned on plus nothing is in learning mode on the firewall and CAV 2.0.0.2 beta with all options turned on, plus all of the other Comodo programs.

I have Win XP SP2 with IE7 and I am on a DSL connection(1.5Mb) using an AMD 3400+ with 512 megs of ram on a wireless connected laptop.

To be fair here, I just did an OS reinstall 2 days ago as I had the MSI problem and my performance was bad. My overall performance was like yours on every page. All I know is that after I did the reinstall of the OS and cleaned it up, all of the Comodo programs ( CPW, CAV, CAS, Backup, i-Vault, and VEngine) started working correctly again and they act totally different in their operation from before. I couldn’t believe the difference.

Off the subject:
Something that I have found to make a difference in my performance is that I have most of the services disabled in Win XP which has been discussed in another part of this forum and can be found on this page:

dead-eye.net - Domain for sale!.

My drive doesn’t churn like it used to and it boots faster and is more secure. Just thought I would mention this as it could be some of the reason for faster loading times.

jasper (B)

I do not have any performance problems with CPF. It is a lot quicker than old Kerio that I had before.

I tryed your ‘images.google.com’ test (:WIN) and cannot see any differences or only minor.

“Computer Security Level” = Allow All = 0.2 seconds - or less
“Computer Security Level” = Custom = 0.24 seconds - or less

Internet connection = 40 mbit
Windows XP SP2
Comodo Firewall 2.3.6.81
Opera v9.02
NOD32 v2.51.26 antivirus, IMON turned on

Hi. A couple of things perhaps not thought of. Now, I did the test as well. About 2 seconds without firewall, 6 seconds with firewall. Ok, a bit of a slow down I admit. Now the catch…However, when you do the test with firewall ON first, you have not previously visited that page, when you do this with firewall OFF\Allow all, you have already visited the page , it is faster the second time even with firewall ON which brings me to this…
I did this with firewall ON in BOTH instances, results on new page: <5-6 seconds first time visit<2 seconds thereafter. So order and number of times matters. I will admit I knew this already but did the test so I could give you an honest evaluation on your finding. If you know what cookies are, this may also explain a bit.

Paul

I got 0.531s with firewall on.
I got 0.625s with firewall in “allow all”

In Opera and IE i got times like 0.05s so its hard to tell them apart…
I never found it to be faster without the firewall.

Hmmmmm. The more I hear the more I think Firefox 2 has been slowing me down. Been getting crashes quite often ONLY with Firefox 2.0. Perhaps Opera is sounding good.

Paul

Opera is a tad faster most of the time, so i think you should try it.
To FF’s defense, I have a lot of extensions that might slow it down… :-[
Like HTML validating every site and some others… ;D

I’m using Opera right now but i’m not too sure about it. It has a hard time loading pages with active content. It’s really no faster if not slower for me. Well, i’ll tweak it a bit and see what happens.

Paul

Forget this , i’m going back to Firefox. Yikes what a mess. Just to import mail settings which it won’t keep. Keeps asking to be default even though I checked yes and box, showing Comodo in plain text, then loads after a minute…arg. No opera for me. I used opera last year and it was not like this, hold on Firefox i’ll be right back…

Paul (:AGY)

LOL! ;D
No problems for me… :wink:

Ahhhh back to Firefox, the chaos is gone. Only calm remains. What happened to Opera? It’s not the smooth running stable browser I remember. But why am I telling you, it works for you so you’ll just laugh it off. :cry: Either way, it took the same amount of time to load with or without firewall set to allow all. Or at least so close it’s barely noticable. Same with IE 7. So that’s 3 browsers tested, all with same results after initial page visit and cookies set.

Paul

It must be something else that slows his connection down…???

Some cable ISPs offer the firewall right with the connection now, many people here, Wisconsin, Illinois were having firewall trouble , slowing down cause they didn’t know they had the firewall service. Now, after complaints they leave it an option. I don’t know if this may be the case but could be checked into. Also, i don’t know what else may be on the system, another firewall, program , malware, hard to say.

gpalika: Could you give a few more specs as to what progs you may have or if another firewall (WinXP) is enabled? Norton? AVG? May be your firewall configuration too. If you could, snapshot it, use the additional options… here at the bottom of screen and post it.
Thanks.

Paul

Hi,

I added more settings information to my original post (at the top). I’m not sure what to do about this. I didn’t have any browsing performance problems until I switched to Comodo from ZoneAlarm, and it only happens if I switch from “Allow All” to “Custom” in Comodo, which to me points to the Firewall.

Here’s a question: Does everyone else have so many items in their component monitor? I have more than 500, all of which were added by Comodo.

Thanks!

I have a total of 608 entries (at present) in the component monitor. It’s going to be large, since it monitors all “components” that are utilized during an allowed application’s connection to the internet (such as the sendmail.dll being utilized by Outlook or similar program when sending mail…)

Custom:
1st run, .08 seconds
2nd run, .10 seconds

Allow All:
1st run, .09 seconds
2nd run, .14 seconds

So it’s slower for me, after the cookie is set (I did not close FF between runs, so the cookies weren’t reset).

LM

You can test, how long does it take to load a webpage here: numion.com - This website is for sale! - numion Resources and Information.

Here’s an update. I uninstalled and reinstalled Comodo Firewall. That seemed to solve the performance problem. Now, several hours later, the performance problem is back. It is the same as before: fast with “Allow all” and slow with “Custom”.

Do you have something blocked in component monitor?

No, there are no blocked items in Component Monitor.

I never found a solution for the Comodo Firewall performance degradation. I ended up uninstalling it and returning to ZoneAlarm.