AV-Comparatives: Performance Test - May 2017 http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php?chart=chart4&year=2017&month=5&sort=1 https://www.av-comparatives.org/performance-tests/
yet every user that uses WD loves to go on forums and say how light it is all I say is "keep tellin' yourself that!"
Panda scored badly for browsing websites. I presume this would be due to Safe Browsing being enabled, and it would have scored better if it was disabled. I have it disabled.
This is the main reason I'm not using it yet, Avira is faster than Microsoft on my win 10 machines, but the difference is acceptable considering that MS is free. Furthermore there are several reports from Chrome and Mozilla engineers stating that Windows Defender is the only AV that doesn't break Chrome and Firefox own security mechanisms.
I have the pro version of Avira, but if WD keeps improving its detection capabilities, free for free I'd go with WD as it is integrated with Windows and plays well with Chrome.
Windows Defender would be my first choice as far as free. It will have to catch up on the performance and protection before I replace paid products with it. They may get there some day. I hope they do.
I have disabled Avira's Web Protection on two machines, as I always browse with Sandboxie there is no need to have it on...
They are still unreliable, and the recent malware protection test proved the new McAfee "LAM" engine is actually inferior to the old one. I've had many computers infected with McAfee because they couldn't get cloud access. The same is with Norton, I don't even know if human malware analysts work there anymore. I wouldn't recommend anyone to install these two products. P. S. Why isn't BullGuard on this test?
BullGuard Impact Score: 30.3 points http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php?chart=chart4&year=2017&month=5&sort=1
