And the winner is ...

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Acadia, Aug 2, 2006.

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

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
  2. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,794
    Location:
    Texas
    Just another opinion. :D
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2006
  3. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I don't know if it is the best but is an excellent and reliable product.:thumb:
     
  4. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,635
    Location:
    UK
    It's based on his experience and his computer setup. It doesn't make it the AV of the year. ;)
     
  5. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    Yup. (Oops, I said that I was "Outta here", didn't I :shifty: )

    Acadia
     
  6. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    AVG in third place and F-Secure scanning faster than KAV?

    :eek: o_O :doubt: :blink: :blink: :ouch: :gack:
     
  7. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    Good grief, you fellows are making it hard for me to stay out ... I don't believe that is the free version of AVG, is it?

    Acadia
     
  8. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma

    F-Secure scans faster on my computer than Kav, it is not even close.
     
  9. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    Scot tested teh network version of AVG but home users would likely stick with the free version.
    rele? F-Secure having multiple engines and KAV having ichecker and iswift, i thought KAV would be faster.

    i guess not. the world is full of surprises.
     
  10. dah145

    dah145 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2006
    Posts:
    262
    Location:
    n/a
    F-secure faster than KAV o_O o_O o_O
    I dont think so, based on my experiences on these two AVs. :D
     
  11. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    I am using both, and after the initial scan KAV scans in about 6 - 7 minutes, and sometimes less for a "Scan My Computer."
    In contrast F-Secure always takes at least 40 minutes to do the same job.

    I do like F-Secure, but I am still having update problems. I just uninstalled/installed it, and if I have problems for the next couple of days, it goes.

    Regards,
    Jerry
     
  12. dallen

    dallen Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2003
    Posts:
    824
    Location:
    United States
    This is exactly what I was going to say. I do not know much about AVG and I really think F-Secure is a very fine product, it came higly recommended by bigc73542, someone whom I respect and who's opinion I value a great deal. However, there is no way that F-Secure is faster than KAV. I know that AVs behave differently on different systems. I just don't buy that claim. During my own recent test I compared the number of files scanned with the duration, and here are the results (granted I was having an issue with KAV so the data for it was not available at the time, but I'm running it now and will post the data momentarily):
    RESULTS
     
  13. dallen

    dallen Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2003
    Posts:
    824
    Location:
    United States
    I guess I was wrong. Judging stictly by time, F-Secure took the least amount of time to run a complete system scan of the AV products I tested. That includes NOD32, KAV, BitDefender and F-Secure. I did not test Norton, but I'm certain that Norton would take considerably longer than F-Secure because I run it on my desktop.

    That being said, below are the statistical results from my test. The interesting thing is that F-Secure scanned the fewest number of files, by far. Judging by number of files scanned / unit of time, F-Secure is by far the least efficient.


    Test System

    Pemtium M 1.7 GHz processor
    1024 MB of PC2700 RAM 333 MHz
    60 GB HD @ 7200 RPM
    (more details available upon request)

    Scan Results

    BitDefender
    # of files scanned: 456,574
    Scan duration(min): 47:34
    Scan Rate (files/min.): 9,598

    F-Secure (Internet Security 2006)
    # of files scanned: 39,025
    Scan duration(min): 33:49
    Scan Rate (files/min.): 1,154

    NOD32
    # of files scanned: 1,173,315
    Scan duration(min): 109:20
    Scan Rate (files/min.): 10,732

    KAV
    # of files scanned: 248,168
    Scan duration(min): 42:56
    Scan Rate (files/min.): 5,780
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2006
  14. FRug

    FRug Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Posts:
    309
    yikes, look at the difference in the amount of scanned files! no wonder fsecure is faster if they only scan ~40.000 files compared to 1.2 million files that nod32 scanned....

    My guess is you either used totally uncomparable configurations (i.e. concerning archives and unpacking), or fsecures unpacking stinks more than i thought. It's absolutely impossible for fsecure as a multi engine product to outperform nod32 or bitdefender....

    Did you reboot between the attempts? Did you make certain you never ever scanned that directory before because of some engines checksumming/only scan changed files options?

    In a good test you must wipe the complete test hd, unpack the full test set, reboot and then start the scan over the set with one scanner. After testing one scanner, wipe the disk again and continue as with the first.
    You also have to make sure you're using comparable settings or at least max out the possible settings.

    According to av-comparatives the fastest scanner atm are panda, avira and nod32 (in that order) while imho panda has an advantage because their engine isn't really doing anything terribly advanced compared to nod32 and avira :)
     
  15. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    This judgement isn't correct because files may vary and because of this , the file size also
    Do you see the difference between scanned files of Vendor1 and Vendor2, for example ?
    In order to have official results , you need to show results KB or MB per second

    Virus Bulletin , June 2006
    Tests on Windows XP , Scanning speed

    NOD32 : 17 395,9 KB/s
    Sophos : 6 501,5 KB/s
    McAfee : 4 179,5 KB/s
    Symantec : 3 657,1 KB/s
    Kaspersky : 3 556,1 KB/s
    AVG : 2 860,7 KB/s
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 3, 2006
  16. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    F-secure in my opinion has a better interface than KAV for sure and as with Scot,i always seem to run in with problems with KAV.
    I dont think at all that AVG is even in contention when we discuss top AV's.
    Also,i will agree with scot that F-secure is a very good AV,which i think has bitdefender and kaspersky's engine...
     
  17. dallen

    dallen Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2003
    Posts:
    824
    Location:
    United States
    I tried F-Secure Internet Security 2006, not the stand alone AV product. Does anyone know if the stand alone AV from F-Secure is compatible with Zone Alarm?
     
  18. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    Something for you all to remember, for those of you who are using Raxco's FirstDefense, some AV will scan ALL of the Snapshots, equivalent to scanning your c:drive multiple times. NOD is one AV that does that, don't know about f-Secure.

    Acadia
     
  19. QBgreen

    QBgreen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Posts:
    627
    Location:
    Queens County, NY
    F-Secure is a fantastic anti-malware program, but it does not work well with others. This includes any current version of ZA. That being said, if you can get your hands on a copy of F-Secure Anti-Virus Client Security 6.02 (legitimately, of course! ;)), you may find that much more to your liking than the consumer versions of F-Secure. Great features, and no extras that you'll never use. I ditched the very poorly interfaced new McAfee VirusScan Plus for it. Like night and day as far as an intuitive interface goes. Great multi-layered firewall with this.
     
  20. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    All i can say is lol.
     
  21. DonKid

    DonKid Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2004
    Posts:
    566
    Location:
    S?o Paulo, Brazil
    LOL.

    Of course not.
    Maybe somebody need to teach him how to install and setup an AV.How it works, what is packers, etc.:D
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.