AV-Comparatives Tests of 2006

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by IBK, Jan 8, 2006.

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

    Rivalen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2005
    Posts:
    413
    About Norton I only have two experiences from work.

    NAV on our mailserver missed a virus that CA picked up on the workstation.

    NAV on my workstation - suddenly slow PC - scanned with KAV on line scanner - found 2 that NAV missed.

    But we will never know what had happened if we were set up the other way around - ie CA on server - NAV on workstations - I have a feeling NAV would get a lot of work to do.

    None is perfect - NAVs record when testing speaks for itself and with newer PCs I´ve never seen any slowdowns of importance.

    Buying AV I would look to NOD, Kaspersky, AVK, maybe Viruscape will turn out to be good value for the money?

    Best Regards
     
  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,024
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Since, viruses are no longer the major malware threat, I was particularly interested in the Trojan detection.

    Surprisingly, from the results, AVG seems to be a slightly better Trojan detector than some other AV’s such as Dr Web, which has been thought in the past to be an excellent Trojan slayer.

    In fact AVG must have flooded their database with Trojans of late as it has improved its detection from 45%-90% between that last 2 on-demand comparative tests.

    In contrast, F-Prot seems to be sliding the other way; dropping from 95% detection in the first test down to 72% in the latest.
     
  3. QBgreen

    QBgreen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Posts:
    627
    Location:
    Queens County, NY
    I've tried NAV2K6 on my 3GHZ HT Intel PC w/ 2 GBS of RAM. As I've stated, while NAV's engine is excellent, it still is wrapped in too much 'pretty pretty'. While it has improved to a great degree as far as system drag is concerned, it can't hold a candle to some of the more fleet and just as powerful programs. 'Bloat' doesn't concern me, as many of us have a storage capacity approaching TBs. Another valid complaint is the difficulty in achieving a clean uninstallation. I used a very good uninstallation monitor before trying NAV6. Otherwise, I'd be plucking my registry clean akin to pulling ticks from a shaggy dog. I've also tried SAV 10.x (corporate). Now that's a fleet and powerful program. If Symantec would make a consumer level program along these lines, I could be coaxed into shelling out some cash.
     
  4. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,868
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    Even IBK says that AV-Test.org is excellent . Like commented in the report. They are longer in this field are and have a very high reputation and more resources. They also offer various very interesting tests, like outbreak tests etc.
     
  5. Devil's Advocate

    Devil's Advocate Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Posts:
    549
    Actually not the question I asked. I have no problems believing AVtest is excellent. :)

    The question is not if AV-test.org is excellent, but if it is *more reliable* than AV comparitives as Stefan says.

    This was a remark that really surprised me.
     
  6. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,868
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    Last time I saw an internal table with deteailed results of the zoo detection rates done by av-test I noticied that the results were quite consistent with those of av-comparatives. Also the retrospective results are quite similar with those of av-test if i remember right, I saw them on a magazine website. Little differences will always be present, as no one has exactly the same test-sets as the others. Best thing to do is to visit various test sites and to build up an opinion about how an av scores based on the results on the various websites.
     
  7. hemkop

    hemkop Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Posts:
    61
    To all you out there... Do not get excited at the av-comparatives test. Let's just say that AVK maybe was the highest that detected mostely, but maybe next time in the test nod32 will be the one that will detect mostely, so it does not depend on the antivirus it depend's on the antivirus Company Lab, if they follow all the new viruses,malwares.
    All AV's is trying to do their best i belive, and next av-comparatives test some other will get high detection, and then after it on 6 month maybe another, So all AV's is good one's.
    Just for AVK detected mostely this time does not mean that it is the best AV, because there is so so many viruses+trojans that maybe if i use AVK i will get infected by hundreds of viruses and AVK does not detect these, but maybe Norton or KAV will detect, and then i can not say that AVK is better or KAV is better... All AV's are great. Just pick which one that fit to your PC and which one you like mostely...
    ´Cheers :cool:
     
  8. Lollan

    Lollan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Posts:
    288
    AVK and KAV run on the same engine :)
     
  9. Wolfe

    Wolfe Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    160
    I fully disagree. ESET kicked Andreas Marx out as for testing NOD32 for very good reasons. I do see the reason though why IBK has no interest at all in kicking Marx's *ss...

    I would say so.

    ...better stay on friendly terms seems the best way to go - no matter what one does believe.
     
  10. Wolfe

    Wolfe Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    160
    Rubbish. One of the very few really reliable testers you are talking about.

    Rubbish again: "So all AV's are good one's". Stick to the one's coming with an Advanced+ consistently. See the logic?
     
  11. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    Just a stupid question. If those small av-vendors are REALLY that good what they are in Av-Comparatives and so light on system resources what we already know, why those BIG players like Symantec or McAfee have not bought out these to have even better protection ever with considerably smaller costs? o_O

    Or, is it simply a result of that which have submitted the most of samples to be tested? :D

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2006
  12. Lollan

    Lollan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Posts:
    288
    Because they buy out their Peters instead. :D:D
     
  13. Randy_Bell

    Randy_Bell Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Posts:
    3,004
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA
    In a free market regulated by civilized governments, one cannot "buy" another company if it doesn't want to "sell" -- hehe .. I don't think the ESET's or Kaspersky's of this world want to become part of McAfee or Symantec ..
     
  14. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    I think that's only a matter of money. :D

    So far, when the US people don't understand that the Russians are actually the descendants of the former Roman Empire, they have no chance to buy a REAL Russian company! :cool:

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
  15. jmschwartz

    jmschwartz Guest

    Hey FF,

    Probably more Byzantine Empire than Roman Empire, which explains why my Russian wife can be so wonderfully "Byza-rre" sometimes. :D
     
  16. QBgreen

    QBgreen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Posts:
    627
    Location:
    Queens County, NY
    So far, when the US people don't understand that the Russians are actually the descendants of the former Roman Empire, they have no chance to buy a REAL Russian company! :cool:

    Actually the "Rus" as they were once known are decendants of the Vikings. Ever wonder why so many beautiful Ukranian and Georgian women are blonde? :D
     
  17. bellgamin

    bellgamin Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    7,275
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Hmm... maybe you should read about proxy battles & hostile take-overs in the Wall Street Journal. Just about a daily occurrence.;)
     
  18. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    That's also true, but they just want to deny that when they want to be the decendants of East-Roman Empire what we know as Byzantine Empire too!:)

    Best regards,
    Firefighter!
     
  19. Joliet Jake

    Joliet Jake Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    Posts:
    911
    Location:
    Scotland
    Doesn't this only happen to companies that are owned by shareholders?
    If a company is privately owned, the owner can't be forced to sell it. (tears forming in corporate america's eyes) ;)
     
  20. Randy_Bell

    Randy_Bell Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Posts:
    3,004
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA
    Thanks - Also my comment must be taken in context; I was thinking of scenario of McAfee or Symantec trying to buyout, say, ESET or Kaspersky. Could not happen unless those companies wanted such a deal which of course they would not want. ;) There is also legal issues of transactions between companies in different countries {under different legal jurisdictions} which someone more knowledgable fhan myself can comment on if they wish .. ;)
     
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.