AV Comparatives has released the newest report.

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by trjam, Mar 19, 2010.

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

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
  2. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Re: AV Comparitives has released the newest report.

    :thumb: Panda
     
  3. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    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.
     
  4. nodyforever

    nodyforever Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Posts:
    549
    Location:
    PT / Lisbon
    Eset up deetection 97,7% =) with 3 FP's and 8,7MB/s scan speed test
     
  5. virushater

    virushater Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Posts:
    1
    Excuse me but how Panda is :thumb: 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 :thumb: .
     
  6. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    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.
     
  7. Sher

    Sher Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Posts:
    366
    Location:
    Pakistan
    It was a huge mistake by TM to take part in the testing.

    I didn't know they were that pathetic.

    What a shame!
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2010
  8. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    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.;)
     
  9. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I apologize for even mentioning Trend in the last few weeks. They are pathetic.
     
  10. codylucas16

    codylucas16 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Posts:
    267
    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. :rolleyes:
     
  11. Graystoke

    Graystoke Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2003
    Posts:
    1,502
    Location:
    The San Joaquin Valley, California
    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. :oops:
     
  12. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    New York City
    No big surprises here. Most did very well. Script malware continues to give problems to most vendors.
     
  13. Sher

    Sher Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Posts:
    366
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Imo, TM should publish this proud achievment on their beautiful website.

    More than their AV, their webpage is far more impressive for sure!
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2010
  14. Pain of Salvation

    Pain of Salvation Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Posts:
    398
    I think I will buy NOD32...
     
  15. kjdemuth

    kjdemuth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Posts:
    2,960
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Way to go Pctools. Who knew? Not bad really.
     
  16. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,852
    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.
     
  17. shadek

    shadek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Posts:
    2,363
    Location:
    Sweden
    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.
     
  18. andyman35

    andyman35 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Posts:
    2,336
    Avira has improved on the FPs while maintaining it's top detection rate.With version 10 about to arrive everything's looking rosy ;)
     
  19. JoeBlack40

    JoeBlack40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Posts:
    1,572
    Location:
    Romania
    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'....
     
  20. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    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.;)
     
  21. eplose

    eplose Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Posts:
    51
    Wow nice result for Avira! :thumb:
    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 :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
     
  22. Thankful

    Thankful Savings Monitor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Posts:
    3,731
    Location:
    New York City
    Avast has really made a top notch free AV.
     
  23. andylau

    andylau Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Posts:
    679
    PC Tools SD+AV v7 is using Symantec engine+SD engine, so the result(rate) is higher than Symantec:D
     
  24. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    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.
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2010
  25. codylucas16

    codylucas16 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Posts:
    267
    it's actually using the virusbuster engine :eek:
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.