AV-TEST certificate Windows 8 Jan/Feb 2013

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by King Grub, Apr 5, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. done75

    done75 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Posts:
    17
    We'll see what AV-Comparatives will say about this... :rolleyes:
     
  2. waters

    waters Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Posts:
    958
    I think this is Trends year ,100% for the last 6 months
     
  3. c2d

    c2d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Posts:
    572
    Location:
    Bosnia
    Yeah Baby....:thumb:

    Love it.
     
  4. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    why not?
    I think bitdefender licence their latest engine.

    I am surprised at escan. looks like it is heavy lots of fp's and not very high detection concidering it uses bitdefender and their in house engine.
    gdata and f-secure did better and use less resources.
    It will be interesting how good the detection is and how light gdata 2014 is with their new inhouse engine.

    avast v7 is doing well cannot wait to see the v8 results.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2013
  5. avman1995

    avman1995 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    Posts:
    944
    Location:
    india
    Interestingly great result for avast really...though This doesnt change my opinion on these Testing Organizations.Comodo isnt that bad at all and there is little of no info of how these test-beds and the test rules/enviroment are created.Neither they have any proof of the things they tested.

    Bottom Line,If you guys have no proof to show me that this was really tested,I would take this as a gospel of money and God. ;)

    Btw,I know I created a Topic on avast forums about this test but This is still my honest view.

    Bye the Way,the new technologies are common both to v7 and v8 so there will hardly be a difference but the sandbox and its behaviour analysis in v8 is improved and this isnt common to v7.So there may be a slight difference.

    I have had Mixed opinions on these type of tests as always as in the past.But a test is a test.

    Just my Opinion.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2013
  6. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    8,251
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    @lodore: eScan's in house engine is primarily used to address some urgent infections and to program registry cleaning procedures. Their primary line of defense is BitDefender and I think the FPs have to do with Active Virus Control set to paranoid mode in the SDK.

    The performance score for eScan is abnormal but proper considering the issues I have noted about eScan 14. The MWL technology has issues with certain network hardware and configurations and causes extreme slowdown in such cases.

    Nice to see PC Tools is doing okay on AV-test again.....I thought they were not included this year.
     
  7. Cutting_Edgetech

    Cutting_Edgetech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Posts:
    5,694
    Location:
    USA
    Good to see Webroot had the top score in performance. Their protection score was good to.
     
  8. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    The reason why Comodo scors so poorly is because they tested only AV component which is rather crappy (lets face it, it is). The rest belongs in the real-world tests...
     
  9. avman1995

    avman1995 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    Posts:
    944
    Location:
    india
    It may be crappy in terms of 0-day but in terms of on-demand detection.I have just tested it and it had quite good detection rate over all.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2013
  10. Sher

    Sher Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Posts:
    366
    Location:
    Pakistan
    I have personally tested Comodo and found it to be rock-solid in terms of protection. Almost impossible to infect the system, if you know how to properly configure it. Moreover, if you consider that it's also free, then it becomes a great product.

    avast! is decent as a freebie, but neither perfect nor great (as some people here try to prove it all the time).

    Bitdefender is the king at the moment. No surprises here.

    Looking forward to upcoming AV-C reports...
     
  11. RejZoR

    RejZoR Lurker

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    King at being broken all the time indeed...
     
  12. Sher

    Sher Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Posts:
    366
    Location:
    Pakistan
    I was referring to the nearly perfect protection it provides. And it's been proved by every single testing organization. And they have now fixed all the bugs and issues.
     
  13. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    broken in what way?
    I have been running the 2014 beta for over a week and haven't had any real issues.

    I do hope bitdefender reduce the installation size of their whole product and engine.
     
  14. Charyb

    Charyb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Posts:
    679
    When did AV-Test start testing performance instead of repair? Just this year?

    They moved performance out of usability and did not test repair.
     
  15. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    they have had performance listed for ages as well as repair. I have no idea why repair is not listed on this test.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2013
  16. ght1

    ght1 Guest

    Bugs, slowdowns, BSoD, unable to install/uninstall and so on. :D But hey: The detection is still superior. :thumb:
     
  17. Charyb

    Charyb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Posts:
    679
    I think the same can be said for any antivirus on any machine with different configurations. I have used Bitdefender since 2007 and have never experienced any significant problems. These type of problems are not only Bitdefender specific.

    I have always been interested in repairs even though I have no trust in and don't rely on a repair.

    Will someone please direct me to the testing procedures? I don't really see any details on this. The performance results in this test is not what I have experienced for some of these av's.

    Thanks
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2013
  18. cobrafirefly

    cobrafirefly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Posts:
    68
    These all seem garbage at performance on Windows 8. Except Webroot. I've got a trial of Eset running and I thought it would be lighter?
     
  19. done75

    done75 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Posts:
    17
    Very funny to read posts of Avast's Fanboys... ROTFL
     
  20. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Well, if you got a trial running then you should know that it is performing better on your system than the results are showing no? :D ;)
     
  21. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Wait and see Sir, wait and see :D
     
  22. Sher

    Sher Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Posts:
    366
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Exactly!

    Rubbish. :rolleyes:
     
  23. AVusah

    AVusah Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Posts:
    274
    Tell me about it. They're paid products are not worth using even if you get a free license, and their free AV leaves no decision up to the user.
     
  24. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,306
    Ain't nothing wrong with Avast Free.:)
    Jerry
     
  25. er34

    er34 Guest

    All testing organizations (AV-Test, AVC, etc.) continue to be biased and non-realistic.

    I do not want to comment the methodology and how outdated it is, and how it does not reflect real-world and how they don't consider the protection technologies as one whole things but only stupid scans <if anybody wants, they can find my previous posts>.... however, it is obvious to me and everybody how a product that gets above 80% (according to them) gets only 2 points (max.6)

    2 out of 6 = makes 30%, however Windows Defender scored 82%
    82% = 82 out of 100 = 5/6

    They might look it on the other side - with the most and the worst results but still this is not correct.
     

    Attached Files:

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.