AV Comparatives has released the newest report.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/

 

Re: AV Comparitives has released the newest report.

Panda

 

the biggest surprise for me is Panda, very good job. but yet again another disappointment that thers STILL not Vipre to be seen....

and a bit disappointing to see Avast hasnt improved really, but maybe it will shine on one of the other tests.

 

Eset up deetection 97,7% =) with 3 FP's and 8,7MB/s scan speed test

 

Excuse me but how Panda is if it has a very high number of false positives? In fact, Bitdefender Company is making a good efforts to avoid the false positives(just 3!!!) after passing a good period in the top of vendors that provide a high false positives .

 

cuz some of us (especially people on this site) dont care all that much about FP's and prefer a high detection rate and can accept some FP's.

 

It was a huge mistake by TM to take part in the testing.

I didn't know they were that pathetic.

What a shame!

 

Because, it is Panda first test, a bench mark, a starting point. Call it what you want. But they kicked ass on detection and yes, have one area to improve and that may or may not be, FPs. How many have been trying for years to even get close to their detection rates their first time.

Panda, is, the new Avira.

 

I apologize for even mentioning Trend in the last few weeks. They are pathetic.

 

Wow Panda. I am impressed. If only I received the windows 7 launch license. t_t damn thing never came in to my inbox. I am impressed with PC Tools as well.

 

I take it that "Tested" means the software failed the test? If so, pretty embarrassing for the software company if it couldn't even get a Standard award.

 

No big surprises here. Most did very well. Script malware continues to give problems to most vendors.

 

Imo, TM should publish this proud achievment on their beautiful website.

More than their AV, their webpage is far more impressive for sure!

 

I think I will buy NOD32...

 

Way to go Pctools. Who knew? Not bad really.

 

Few notes:

• Grats on panda, but with 47Fps has a long way to go.
• Avira, still the same, lots of Fps but High detection. It's a shame they don't work more on this.
• K7, what a joke amount of FPs. Doesn't deserve to be in AVC in my opinion.
• Norman & Kingsoft have sucked since as far as I can remember, also don't deserve to be in AVC.
• Microsoft from 8*% last year to 96.3% awesome improvement with only 3 Fps, I'm glad to see they are working hard at it, but they need to work on their scanning speed now.
• GData, impressive detection with only 5 Fps would be the winner in my opinion if it wasn't such a monster of a program.

 

Think Avira really improved on the FPs. GData and Avira are pretty much the best AVs when it comes to on-demand scanning it seems.

 

Avira has improved on the FPs while maintaining it's top detection rate.With version 10 about to arrive everything's looking rosy

 

What do you mean?Not improved?The free version,among all those "big premium boys",with 97,3% it's not an improvement?Tell me you're kiddin'....

 

Trend may not be that good in malware detection, but they are good/focussed on URL blocking. so they may score good in the whole product dynamic tests.

But Panda Danda.

 

Wow nice result for Avira!
And to think they didn't count the packer-based detections...I'm really impressed.

Guess they could get higher taking the packers into consideration, oc with a little price of f/p.

Keep up the good work

 

Avast has really made a top notch free AV.

 

PC Tools SD+AV v7 is using Symantec engine+SD engine, so the result(rate) is higher than Symantec

 

im not comparing to a free product, im comparing to the results of the last comparative which showed similar results (not a big improvement between v4.8 and v5 is what i was disappointed at) if anything it actually dropped, but not enuff for it to be a real big diff.

 

it's actually using the virusbuster engine