Another test comparitive

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by I who know nothing, Mar 6, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ok Im sure we are all in the mood to digest yet another comparitive test lol. I dont know if this test has been posted before, I apologise if it has.

    Read more at the following site:

    http://www.zone365.com/content/10/96/2
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 7, 2005
  2. Chris12923

    Chris12923 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    1,097
    I didn't even look at this line at first. Just dug into the main body. I was thinking "All products were tested with the current version as of 6-14-04"...WTH? LOL

    Thanks,

    Chris
     
  3. Well perhaps the date is less important than the inclusion of some AV's which dont normally make it onto other tests.
     
  4. LowWaterMark

    LowWaterMark Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Posts:
    17,877
    Location:
    New England
    Whenever you post something like this you should include a link to the original source. This appears to be it:

    http://www.zone365.com/content/10/96/2

    Also, you should not copy the entire contents. I'll trim the first post down to a summary and link to the original where people can read the entire article.
     
  5. For example I didnt know much about MKS until recently and I dont think the average pc user does either. KingSoft is a chinese AV which I have never heard of before but on this test its right next to NOD.
     
  6. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Interesting test,but 321 samples isn't enough to compare anything imo.
     
  7. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    A somewhat more quantitative examination that affirms RejZoR's opinion can be found here. One can quibble with the details, but the basic conclusions are sound.

    Blue
     
  8. NAMOR

    NAMOR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Posts:
    1,526
    Location:
    Arkham Asylum
    These test results look familiar... If I remeber correctly they were posted at many forums by someone pushing eXtendia AVK and MKS. :D
     
  9. 4343

    4343 Guest

    We just have to believe to that test lol

    If you ask me all tests are not reliable unless tester provide us with name of all tested Viruses

    I can run a false test too and bring visitors to my web site with milion of banners... maybe I would make 20$ from banner clicking lol
     
  10. rdsu

    rdsu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Posts:
    4,456
    Me too... :D

    In May or June of 2004... ;)
     
  11. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    I believe the tester's name was 'Kobra'...
     
  12. stormbyte

    stormbyte AV Expert

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Posts:
    97
    As far as I know this is Kobra's test.
    Its been available on the net since april of 2004

    M
     
  13. Well apart from the voracity or otherwise of the methodology the results are pretty much in line with other tests are they not? with the possible exception of NOD perhaps. The big names are at the top, the free proggies inhabit the middle ground and the lesser lights are in the lower level.
     
  14. BlueZannetti

    BlueZannetti Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Posts:
    6,590
    Correct. Here is the link to the initial thread as I recall over at DSLReports, it dates from mid-June of last year, although there could have been an earlier report with fewer AV's.

    At the time, it seemed to be a fairly representative ranking. But things change with time, and ~9 months is almost an eternity in this field. It's out of date in detail, although some broad conclusions (e.g. the general performance of KAV and KAV based engines) still apply, others may be superceded by expanding signature files and improved heuristics.

    I would place more trust in a recent challenge test, say those from av-comparatives.org.

    Blue
     
  15. TeknO

    TeknO Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Posts:
    147
    Location:
    Istanbul, TURKEY
    There were more than 120.000 viruses and malicous codes in the computer world. Only 321 samples isn't enough to take a decision.
     
  16. sinbad370

    sinbad370 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    Posts:
    68
    Location:
    Georgia
    eXtendia AVK always seems to do very well. I find it a little heavy on usage though. Thats why I use it as my backup on demand scanner and nod32 as main (very light Av). I do wish they had a 2005 eXtendia AVK. I sent an email asking about this and haven't received a reply yet. Not suprised.
     
  17. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    You'll only see a new eXtendia AVK when RAV updates are discontinued.
     
  18. Grumble

    Grumble Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Posts:
    185
    Location:
    the sunshine state
  19. sir_carew

    sir_carew Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Posts:
    884
    Location:
    Santiago, Chile
    I don't trust in it test.
    Please, NAV detecting more using heuristic than NOD32/Dr.Web/KAV? Impossible. NOD32's heuristic is the best on the market and Dr.Web's heuristic is good. NAV's heuristic sucks.


     
  20. I just tried MKS aka ArcaVir on my pedestrian PIII 450 MHZ 256RAM pc and had to uninstall as it was slowing things too much. Just tried the new AVAST since it supposedly has improved resource usage from previous versions. Hmm cant say I notice much difference, AntiVir still seems to be the smoothest on my slow pc.

    So what does anyone think of that chinese AV KingSoft? I have never seen it tested anywhere before. Its always interesting to know what the chinese are up too lol, they have just entered the manned space race after all.
     
  21. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Did you simply accept the default settings or did you try and optimize/tweak the settings? Did you run the program with all features enabled? Did you completely uninstall any other AV's on your computer?

    I am not saying that it did not slow down your computer, but time trying to tweak the settings may have helped. Simply stating that it slowed down your system, without a little more detail, is not a great help to other members here who may be thinking of trying this AV on their older computers.
    Relatively unknown. I have seen some 'private' testing on some of the forums where the detection rate was nothing to write home about.
     
  22. I left ArcaVir on the default settings. By the same token KAV 5.0 Personal on default settings seemed to be lighter on resources than ArcaVir on my slow pc athough both seem to be best suited to high end users.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.