Av-Comparatives: On-Demand Comparative August 2010

well I searched in the forum and I didnt find this AV-C Test, It seems that it was released at the same time of the whole product Dynamic test september

here is the link
http://www.av-comparatives.org/comparativesreviews/main-tests

 

yes I was right ..
this test was released today with the Dynamic test.

Read AV-C´s Blog
http://www.av-comparatives.org/weblog/?p=214

 

That's some nice showcase from avast!. Especially performance graphs are literaly off the charts...

 

Impressive Avast, I hope they can improve soon the detections in the Dynamic test.

 

There are a lot of AVs with 99% of detection ... Almost all the AVS increased their detections this test ..
its nice to see that

 

I wonder if the malware detection results for Norton AntiVirus 2011 were based on a (1) standard full system scan or a (2) reputation scan or (3) both?

I wonder what the malware detection results for Norton Power Eraser would have been?

 

Microsoft continues to dance on the conservative side between FPs and Detection rates.

 

AVIRA continues its great performance. It did very well on the dynamic testing as well. FPs are also coming down. Is their behavior module working?

 

I'd call 80 something percent (OneCare) to 97% in 1 year pretty good wouldn't you? It's always the last hurdle that's the hardest, the question is, are they capable of pushing it to the 98%, 99% zone? Time will tell.

 

Yes indeed! Some people were really trying to undermine customer confidence by suggesting that V10 didn't work as expected when compared to V9. Well the latest results only show how this company is always performing at the top. ProActiv? Good question.

 

Love these tests
Always a nice read

 

It is odd looking at the results of Trend Micro, it did very well dynamically but performed poorly when tested on demand.

 

One reason could be because of the different sample size, on demand is much bigger.

 

Wait a minute! Where is Comodo? I was hoping against hope that Melih would put his action where his mouth is. I guess it is all talk. Why is it that Comodo does not get tested by a reputable organization like AV-Comparatives?

Any idea IBK?

Thanks.

 

Because Melih DOESN'T want to put his money where his mouth is. That and it would probably croak under real testing and not Youtube experiments and dead-link clicking security enthusiasts...oh, wait, those are the only ones using Comodo products...well, there is your reason for not testing

 

Which means that even "On demand tests" are necessary in order to evaluate an AV's performance. Some people are suggesting that only dynamic tests are an indication of good performance. Trend Micro seems a good supporting example.

 

Thank you a lot for your answer. I could not have put it better.

Thanks.

 

sad to see that panda generated so many FPs

 

Why was Avira paid tested, but the free version of Avast? Also, is AVG the free version, or paid.

 

because thats what each vendor wanted, avast wanted the free version tested, while avira wanted the paid version

 

its always informative reading the results of these tests....

 

Script malware detection continues to not be the strength of most AVs.

 

This is creating quite a stir at Comodo forum, 2 threads have been opened for this.lol

Good results for Avira(both in on demand and dynamci).

As for Trend Micro, it seems that their main protection come from their Web protection, that is why they do well in dynamic tests but not in on demand tests.

MSE doing well as usual.

Panda doing well, just need to lower its FP a bit.

Good results for Symantec but not too good for Kaspersky.

Bitdefender doing well in on demand tests but not in dynamic tests, strange? I thought that they had a good BB as well.

And finally good results for the nice free light Avast.

Regards

 

90+ Fp by panda is just too much

great work by eset,avast,avira,norton,fsecure

 

avast! guys want to show ppl that free can be just as good if not better than payable.