AV-Comparatives 2011 dynamic tests

Nice job for Panda

 

Overall result till now in ''blocking'' malwares,
1. F Secure (99.2%)
2. Bitdefender & Symantec (99.1%)
3. G Data (98.9%)
4. Trend Micro & Panda (98.6%)
5. Eset (98.2%)

Trend is impressing me day by day. Cloud is winning the race... Panda, Trend Micro and F-Secure.

 

I cannot find those exact numbers in AV-Comp's 2011 dynamic tests. Where did those numbers come from?

 

Now look Pops,

it isnt so much the vender but the version. All have had some good ones and some bad ones. I honestly think that explains most. Also for Eset, this looks to be one of the good ones. If they cant get their HIPS right.

 

Agree

 

strange that F-Secure's Deepguard are tested, but they don't test Comodo

 

Why is that strange?

Deepguard is one of the modules (behavior if i'm right) inside the product.

 

I knew I wasn't smart enough to understand it all.
Pops

 

The graph, I believe that he is picking the beginning of the year to current month.

http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart2.php

 

I dont think they want to waste their time testing what really isn't an Internet Security product, more so a DIY (Do It Yourself) Product since it alerts and asks the user for EVERY THING.

 

Nope. The numbers on that chart do not match the numbers given by sg09.

@sg09- Where did you get those numbers?

 

Yes they do match, if you choose Mar (or the 2 previous months) as start.

 

March - June overall results sorted by DETECTION RATES

F-Secure - 99.2%
Bitdefender - 99.1%
Symantec - 99.1%
G Data - 98.9%
Panda - 98.6%
Trend Micro - 98.6%
Eset - 98.2%
Kaspersky - 97.7%
Avast - 97.1%
Avira - 96.9%
Qihoo - 96.1%
Sophos - 95.6%
AVG - 95.1%
Webroot - 94.7%
McAfee - 93.5%
K7 - 91.8%
PCTools - 91.2%

Panda says their free product (Cloud Antivirus) also get the same definition updates as the retail products (Suites).
If others vendors also have the same update routine for both paid and free. Then Panda free detection rates are far ahead compared to Avast Free, Avira Free and AVG Free

Well Done Panda Keep it up !!!

 

Love to see see tests with outdated adobe and java and letting some malware get thru the browser see how the AVs react

 

sorting this way and mousing over the green bar on the graph matches to me.


~~ copyrighted graph image removed ~~

 

congratulations to ESET guys, they did well
congratulations to symantec for the better protection rate, not necessarily detection
my only wish is a better performance and low resource usage

 

Wheres Microsoft?

 

Yes Namor is right and has given the proper screenshot...

 

What is actually this user dependent part means? Is it too hard for normal users?

 

Probably something that requires your decision. Normal users may lack the knowledge.

 

def congrats to panda. i just wish it was lighter on the system and a bit more organized and i would prob be using it. just way to many procc's for me and no matter what some tests have said it drags my systems wayyyy down (brand new i7 2600k with 16gb ram and i can still "feel" it) though same goes for bitdefender espcially the 2012 beta i really like it but.... just dont know why some companies cant get usage as low as others its def possible but they dont seem to bother year after year to attempt to do it.

and also a bit dissapointed with avast this time around.

 

normally this means like when you get a pop up and it asks what to do. like behaviour blocker or hips..

 

I've always heard Panda was very light.

 

I have one big question

On av-comparatives last on-demand report on Page 4 they mention about the third party engines used by vendors.

G Data (based on Bitdefender + Avast engines) and QiHoo (based on Bitdefender engine) have poor results compared to Bitdefender's own product

Overall detection rates for the 3 products are as follows :
Bitdefender - 99.1%
G Data - 98.9%
Qihoo - 96.1%

So how come if G Data and QiHoo uses bitdefender engines has low detection rates compared to Bitdefender's own product

**Note - F-Secure is also based on Bitdefender engine but its results are better than Bitdefender. Which is possible and can happen

 

that can be due e.g. different web reputation / url blacklists and other technologies/features.