Avira Personal vs. Avira Premium

I have a few questions regarding Avira. It seems to always have some of the highest on-demand and proactive detection rates on AV Comparatives. I was wondering though if the detection rates are the same for Avira Personal and Avira Premium? Is the only real difference the features? If you used Avira Personal, would the same malware be detected, just at different times, since Avira Personal has no web protection?

 

see for difference in features. I don't think there is a difference in detection rates between the 2
http://www.avira.com/en/avira-free-antivirus

 

Avira Premium has the ProActiv module, but from what I know of it, it checks behaviour of executed processes, and most big tests are just on demand, so nothing is executed there. Avira personal would probably score lower than premium on AV-comparatives' whole product dynamic test and similar test.

 

What's funny is on Virus Bulletin, the free version had the highest proactive detection rate, period, even higher than the premium version?

http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/latest_comparative/index

 

Premium version comes with the WebGuard module (among other features) to protect you against malicious and/or infected websites.

WG is constantly updated, irrespectively of the main Guard module's own VDF files.

Virusbtn is just that, funny. Take their tests with a grain of salt.

 

IIRC, proactiv also only works on x86 configurations, so you won't have the benefit of behavioral detections on x64 platforms.

 

I really feel Avira is losing ground fast compared to other vendors . . .

 

Based on what - a hunch? Av-Comparatives tells otherwise - not 1 separate, but all test, including the final summary report.

 

Because they only hold strong in their engine department (Signature, Heuristics).

While most competitors are improving their suites (Cloud, HIPS, BB's, Sandbox and many other technologies).

Now i'm not saying they are bad just that they are very very slow catching with technology, even their ProActiv Module which already has some time is still kinda under developed.

 

I recently tested in-depth AVIRA Premium and AVIRA Personal (v10) and the only problem I see is that they update slow . In case a malware is submitted to them , it takes them some time to update - and update during weekends are rare , which makes their users vulnerable to 0-day threats . Known threats (those that are out from ~3 days) are no problem for AVIRA in no way . I tested without web guard and if it is true it is updated independantly from the main VDF , then it might protect further. But fact is AVIRA is light and even though it has no HIPS and no cloud , protection level is High - it is ranked number 3 in the Dynamic AV-Comparatives' test and got all Advanced+ all through the year.

 

No, the Premium isn't there. It's the Pro version - the one for companies.

 

I agree with you here, it's only good as a pure antivirus. But after all it depends on the goals of a company, sometimes it's better to finetune your present strengths and polish what you're already offering (the way I think Eset also are doing). Because what's the use of adding features of questionable quality and implementation. In this case, as with some other products, I (and I'm sure not only me) will use only their core function as an antivirus and some other program as sandbox, HIPS or behaviour blocker.

 

not deviating from what u asked

avira free would be sufficient and same as pro in detection ... very rare that pro detects and free doesnt

 

Note that Pro is not Premium.

 

Well I dont know how much you are into AV but out of my test I can prove that Avira is the AV who is doing best, actually by a lot.

Avira may also be the best coded AV on the market.

 

Thanks God for that! If I need cloud I shall add Immunet, if I need sandbox, I shall add Sandboxie. I do not want to Avira become one more bloatware.

 

Details , please

 

Fortunately, for safeness concerns, more and more people every day are seeing it that way

 

Well, everyone has their own opinions, but my ex school (Yeah i'm graduated!!! ) had Avira Free on all it's computers, and guess . . . signature based couldn't handle all the USB threats, even when clicking remove it failed to remove them.

 

Schools, Universities, Public Libraries ought to have virtualizers installed, no antivirus can deal with the amount of trash found in third party USB flash drives. It would have been difficult for any AV, to deal with such a situation. Last but not least Avira personal should only be for private users, meaning your ex school wouldn't be entitled to any support.

 

Hahaha, at the end they got rid of it (They have Avira on the old computers).
The new ones all have DeepFreeze, which does wonders except when i save my works on it and then it restarts

 

Sure, direct download at: http://immunet.dk/t1.zip
Well a quick mix up as it isn't made for publishing. I can tell that Norton failed that much that I wouldn't include Symantec (by request from a norton employee)

 

Thank you very much for posting ! I respect your time to write this and for the test but this is far from professional - did you run all the missed samples or your just performed on-demand scan ? Because you call this "scanning test" ... I am not saying that AVIRA is bad , no . But we all know Symantec are not that fast at adding new samples but they rely on the cloud and on SONAR so you must have tested / run the files (in case you haven't done so). By running the files, it becomes real. Otherwise you are doing nothing.

 

3GUSER as i said, this test is internal and was not meant to be posted at its was made. Trust me its done professional and a malware researcher from all vendors except Avast have been confirming the result. The researcher from Symantec acknowledge that Symantec was totally failing.
Well this have been a little off topic, sorry for that.
Avira is the best AV in detection for pure antivirus Emsisoft only scores well because of other features they use. and so does many of the vendors you have seen been tested.

 

OK ,OK . One last thing on this just because you didn't answer my question - is this pure manual scanning only or you actually ran all the samples missed by the manual scan ?