CA Antivirus vs AVG Free

[duke1959]

What the heck, why not? They both have heuristics. They both have E-mail Protection. And they both are said to run light and offer enough basic protection for the average home PC user. Also they are both West Coast Labs Level 2 certified, now that the latest AVG version has passed this test like CA has already done several times in the past.

[Seishin]

Maybe eTrust's AV heuristics are way too aggressive:


http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,12...S/article.html


I'd shoot for AVG. It's a nice and reliable AV but the only turn-off thing I saw is the updates thingy. I couldn't automatically update so I ended up ditching this program. Pity though.


Cheers.

[farmerlee]

I think they are both great programs. Currently they are both free so it will depend largely on what the user prefers.
My own preference is for avg, i don't like the CA av user interface. I have just started using the new version 8 of CA's av on my test machine so i'll see if this version changes my mind. I think its great that the free version 7 license is tranferable to version 8.

I have used both of these av's in the past and eTrust EZ antivirus recently, both do a good job in my opinion, I like both of these programs and wouldn't have a problem running either one of them, I would give the edge to CA Antivirus, I just liked the GUI and layout of the program better, very easy to navigate and use, with good logging features.

[ggf31416]

Originally Posted by duke1959

What the heck, why not? They both have heuristics.

The 7% of AVG in the latest proactive test (which measure the heuristic/generic on-demand detection rate) vs an unknow result of CA... I think that there are better options.

[IBK]

i think i would prefer avg.

[ajcstr]

CA will give you automatic updates and the ability to schedule scans. For some reason I don't believe AVG does both though I have never used it.

Also, the free CA product is the same as the paid.

[IBK]

avg has also a scheduler.

Originally Posted by ajcstr

Also, the free CA product is the same as the paid.

is this meant as good thing or bad thing?

[duke1959]

I must say that CA mistaking a Windows Service for malware and thus causing some PC's to crash is scary. This happened with Windows 2003 , but I I guess it didn't affect Windows XP, correct?

[farmerlee]

Originally Posted by duke1959

I must say that CA mistaking a Windows Service for malware and thus causing some PC's to crash is scary. This happened with Windows 2003 , but I I guess it didn't affect Windows XP, correct?

Yeah i guess so, i've used etrust av on win xp with no problems like your one. I'm not sure if ca's av is designed to run on 2003.

[duke1959]

Maybe lightening won't strike twice now that this has happened and CA will be much more thorough now? How do you like CA? I have it on my desktop, but didn't install it yet. i like AVG free, but the one Auto Update a day just puts me off a bit.

[Patrician]

Originally Posted by duke1959

Maybe lightening won't strike twice now that this has happened and CA will be much more thorough now? How do you like CA? I have it on my desktop, but didn't install it yet. i like AVG free, but the one Auto Update a day just puts me off a bit.

What should really put you off is the pretty bad detection rate by either of your chosen AV's.

You would be much better protected with Avast Home Edition. It's also free and does at least offer some decent protection.

Trev

[kdm31091]

Avast is usually a total of about 2% better then AVG on the AV-Comparatives. I haven't seen it being "much better" in a few years now. AVG and Avast are more or less equal in detection and AVG is lighter. I like Avast too, but I'm just saying, it's basically AVG detection with a slicker look and some more features.

[duke1959]

I just want to say that I am currently using AOL AVS and happy. I was just curious about the new version of CA. I also started a thread on Avast vs AVS. My input is there. I will further say that I liked something about all the free AV's. Take care everyone.

[TAP]

Originally Posted by kdm31091

Avast is usually a total of about 2% better then AVG on the AV-Comparatives. I haven't seen it being "much better" in a few years now. AVG and Avast are more or less equal in detection and AVG is lighter. I like Avast too, but I'm just saying, it's basically AVG detection with a slicker look and some more features.

In practical and reality, I have many strong reasons that make me choose avast! Home over AVG Free (or even AVG Pro), not only judge by based on detection rates found in some online test results.

For example

1. avast! Home has a complete automatic updates with fast and reliable update servers, it can be automatically checked/updated every 4 hours by default or every 1 hour by manual setting.

AVG Free just has a fixed-scheduled updater once a day with unreliable update servers, a scheduled updater itself is also unreliable. Don't tell me you can manually update AVG yourself, I want my antivirus automatically checks for new updates as soon as I get connected and as often as possible while I'm online.

The *big difference* is that when it comes to an outbreak that antivirus vendors have to release an urgent signatures several times a day, in this case for those who online almost all the time, AVG Free's scheduled updater itself is pretty useless if you want your antivirus gets up-to-date as much as possible for a peace of mind.

2. I feel more safe with avast! Web Shield (HTTP scanner) that I think it's a special-extra protection (I don't care about other shields such as IM, P2P, Mail), it has been explained here many times by experts (people who develop antivirus software) why the HTTP scanner is so important for effectively stop some kind of malware.

If you have to deal with exploit malware such as WMF or others via IE (unfortunately, I always use IE as my main browser), you'll see how unreliable the AVG's Resident Shield (or real-time file scanner of other antivirus) is, HTTP scanner has its unique purposes that cannot be replaced (or compared) by traditional real-time file scanner in such scenario.

3. Scanning engine, I personally believe that the avast! engine is so robust, has more unpackers (for archives and run-time packers) than the AVG engine, AVG on-demand scanner can't even delete malware packed in archives, users have to manually delete found malware themselves, that's strange for me. And according to Grisoft official site, AVG just has the scanning of NTFS alternate data streams in AVG 7.5 beta, while avast! 4 Home has this ability for a quite long time.

AVG claims it has static, dynamic (code emulation) heuristic analysis, generic detection but AVG has a pretty poor results in proactive test (according to the latest AV-Comparatves.org) which quite strange for me. avast! is rather contrary, it has quite higher scores even though avast! is rather a pure signature-based scanner without so-called heuristic in its on-demand scanner (but with generic detection, as far as I know).

In the past, AVG can't properly detect some (complex) malware that found in the real world such as Win32: Polip (polymorphic virus) and WMF exploit sample while avast! can detect them all 100%, according to AV-Test.org.



That's my personal reasons, it's just me, avast! Home just works best for my needs.

[duke1959]

That's great what everyone posted about on Avast, but there is another thread I started on Avast vs AOL AVS where it is more appropriate. I'll debate the Avast users there. Here however, I certainly think because of just the update feature alone I would use CA over AVG, but after the free year was up I wouldn't be afraid to use AVG for any reason. (Even over Avast)

[farmerlee]

Originally Posted by duke1959

Maybe lightening won't strike twice now that this has happened and CA will be much more thorough now? How do you like CA? I have it on my desktop, but didn't install it yet. i like AVG free, but the one Auto Update a day just puts me off a bit.

Have you got the latest version 8 of CA's antivirus installed?

[duke1959]

no, that's some of the purpose for my threads. I just can't find enough info on CA, especially the new version. I have however, been told in the CA Antivirus 2007 thread that the latest version isn't as light as it use to be. Not so sure now I would use it over AVG Free since I never had any slow downs when I used that AV.

[duke1959]

AVG free just had a new program update on 9/26. Among other things, it claims to have improved Polymorphic detection. I have looked at some more screen shots of CA and I like AVG Free better. Also at least I know how it does in tests like the AV Comparitives, where I can't find much on CA. AVG and Avast were very close in AV Comparitives, and I think AVG Free runs much lighter than Avast, and probably CA at this point.

[poles18]

Originally Posted by ajcstr

CA will give you automatic updates and the ability to schedule scans. For some reason I don't believe AVG does both though I have never used it.

Also, the free CA product is the same as the paid.

actually avg does both

[aigle]

Originally Posted by poles18

actually avg does both

As I remember AVG does not has auto-update? Am I true?

[unhappy_viewer]

Originally Posted by farmerlee

Yeah i guess so, i've used etrust av on win xp with no problems like your one. I'm not sure if ca's av is designed to run on 2003.

Thats right. As I have mentioned before, Win 2003 is a server OS and requires enterprise-level protection software. You simply cannot install a home security solution on a server OS.

[duke1959]

AVG Free has an Automatic Update feature that can be set for all hours of the day, but if it is set for say 1:00 P.M. and there is an update later than that. Then I don't believe it will receive it until 1:00 the following day along with what ever new update came out that day. However you can just do a manual update if you like. It also has a Scan option that can be set for all hours, but only for a Daily scan.

[ellison64]

[quote=TAP]In practical and reality, I have many strong reasons that make me choose avast! Home over AVG Free (or even AVG Pro), not only judge by based on detection rates found in some online test results.

For example

edit
3. Scanning engine, I personally believe that the avast! engine is so robust, has more unpackers (for archives and run-time packers) than the AVG engine, AVG on-demand scanner can't even delete malware packed in archives, users have to manually delete found malware themselves, that's strange for me. And according to Grisoft official site, AVG just has the scanning of NTFS alternate data streams in AVG 7.5 beta, while avast! 4 Home has this ability for a quite long time.
edit

The thread here at avast forums sounds rather strange to me too ,concerning avast resident and on demand scanner detection.
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=23772.0

ellison

[mercurie]

Originally Posted by IBK

i think i would prefer avg.

Me too and I have used both. AVG would be my pick of the two.