The fastest scanner ever?

Hi to everyone! I have done some full scans from my PC. Those programs were with the strongest possible settings, deepest heuristics, all files, archives scanning, packed files etc. Here are the results.

BitDefender 7.0 Free

156 418 Files
2 821 Folders
8 447 Archives
2 668 Packed

48 min 39 s Time


NOD32 v.2.0 1.437 20030613

86 844 Files

27 min 37 s Time


Kaspersky Beta 4.5.0.19

158 453 Files
2 819 Folders
8 995 Archives
645 Packed

59 min 21 s Time


RAV 8.6 104

154 221 Files
2 819 Folders
7 741 Archives
3 065 Packed

42 min 25 s Time

Before you are saying that those report parameters are not the same, I don't believe that those numbers of the scanned files are not made with very different rules, because KAV has now the largest amount of files now, when it hasn't that before in my first test some months ago!

I have to admit that there is still a " bug" in those packed files numbers with BitDefender and RAV, because none is better than KAV in this case!

Unfortunately I couldn't find the numbers of those scanned folders, archives and packed with NOD!

I am not trying now to insult anyone, I am just asking for your opinion about the fastest scanner in my PC?

Remember this, the scanning time is not the whole thing, we must think also how much a program is capable to scan!

"The truth is out there, but it hurts!"

Best Regards,
Firefighter!

 

Firefighter, As you like statistics you do the sums
Scan rate in files per second = Time (secs) divided by the No of files scanned.

 

Let us even be more realistic than that. All files and their sizes and contents are NOT created equal. I can set a scanner to exclude scannig many file type and even specific files and end up to be the fastest on the block.

When you start telling me what each on of those you have tested is really unpacking and scanning... then we can talk business.

I knw exactly where on my systems I want and AV or AT scanner to look...and also the places I am never concerned about.

The average user does not...so I think they would be impressed with such tests..For me I just want the job done..and done correctly..time is not important.

If you rush through a good meal..you will never enjoy the tastes.

Fine wine is the same...bad beer will give you gas

 

Agreed Primrose, what I was trying to say is that a very simple scan speed could easily be arranged. If we scan a known directory of a specific size & file type, set the AV's to scan those file types (and ensure all the AV's are scanning the same number of files). Then do the sum above it will give us a good indication of how efficient the scan engine is. Adding in variable such as packed files would add another dimension which would be probably be harder to test especially when the main criteria is finding malware - Speed and accuracy there may be a trade off
For me accuracy would be more important.

 

One thing to remember. The speed of electrons does not change. When you test different programs doing the same thing on the same computer, the program that took the longest, did the most work. Simple physics.
Now, was all that work necessary? Hard to tell in a lot of cases, but I would prefer my AV be steady and effective with speed as a third or fourth determining factor.
I did have to get rid of KAV 4.09 because it was a snail, but I am very happy with 4.5.
NOD 32 is cool. It's good and it's fast, but it doesn't do the job the same way as KAV or RAV, so there's a difference in time.

 

does it matter much ? the important thing is that the resident scanner is fast.right?

 

I would rather say the important thing is the resident monitor detects what you expect it to detect, and doesn't take too much time doing it.
A slight hit on speed may bother some, but be of no concern to others.