av-test.org test results: security suites protection/performance last 6 months

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by acr1965, Aug 19, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
  2. Toby75

    Toby75 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Posts:
    480
    89% for Avira? Never heard of such a thing.
     
  3. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Yeah, that AVIRA score is indeed weird. On the other hand it's funny how avast! FREE is up with the max protection expensive internet security suites :D
     
  4. AVusah

    AVusah Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Posts:
    274
    Avira most likely got a low score due to lack of HIPS/proactive protection.
     
  5. cobrafirefly

    cobrafirefly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Posts:
    68
    These guys with their "system load" qualifier. They always say Kaspersky is light on your system when we know it isn't. There must be more to 'heaviness' than RAM usage...
     
  6. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    As with most security software, performance relies on a lot of factors including hardware and other software installed.

    IME, the last few versions of Kaspersky have been as light as a feather on my systems.
     
  7. Toby75

    Toby75 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Posts:
    480

    No HIPS testing here. That's matousec your referring to where Avira fails miserably as do many other security suites. Hands down Avira still has one of the best scanning engines out of the major players. Set the heuristics on high and then see what the results look like. I used to use Avira at max settings and had virtually no false positives.
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2013
  8. AVusah

    AVusah Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Posts:
    274
    My understanding is that they test all of the products' features, not just scanning, like VirusBulletin. Hence, Avira does a great job at detecting most of the stuff, but cannot compete with software like BD, F-Secure, Kaspersky etc. that have proactive protection features as well.
     
  9. Toby75

    Toby75 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Posts:
    480

    Avira Free has proactive protection, no? Avira Free is on par with the top leading brands in terms of detection....it's the HIPS that fail....taken from matousec

    This is why a layered approach is best. :)
     

    Attached Files:

  10. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    This. Kaspersky always on top of performance charts, yet whenever i tried it it felt so horribly sluggish. A lot better these days than it did in the past but still really heavy. Same goes for MSE. Always "light" in all the tests but when i tested it on my high performance rig, it was causing horrible slowdowns and overal sluggishness. Especially when dealing with game installers packed ina single EXE (of lets say 2GB size). I never got that with avast!, AVG or AVIRA, yet these never score as good as the above two. Which makes no sense at all.
     
  11. true indian

    true indian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    Posts:
    760
    Location:
    india
    There is some improvement for avast since last year,it even outperformed Qihoo this time :thumb:
     
  12. AVusah

    AVusah Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Posts:
    274
    That's what I'm saying. Avira has good signature and heuristic detection, but poor HIPS/proactive protection, which is why it doesn't score as high in real world tests.
     
  13. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    does anyone see whether the machines being tested on were x64, x86 or some combo of both?
     
  14. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    I've used KIS for almost a year now. Initially it was a little sluggish, especially opening MS programs or when I had the web protection enabled. Otherwise it ran pretty light for me. After running a few weeks the MS programs were starting to open faster and I sometimes have to disable the web protection or my computer churns away trying to make it across the web. Otherwise it's pretty light. I have any unknown program to be treated as untrusted so maybe that helps some?
     
  15. mattdocs12345

    mattdocs12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Posts:
    1,785
    Location:
    US
    No FortiClient tested... it's missing a major player here.
     
  16. muf

    muf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Posts:
    926
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    Kav is ok, a little heavy but not too bad. I have a license for Pure 3.0, but I still miss KAV 4. That was a great AV. They used to be apart from the crowd, but now it looks and acts like all the others. Currently using BD TP and it's playing nice.

    Paul
     
  17. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    here is the info I received from av-test.org:
    looks kind of like a hodgepodge ..wish they would have kept the tests on the same machines
     
  18. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    Good results for the top players as always. Kaspersky and Bitdefender!
     
  19. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,957
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    I'm confused by this discussion of Avira's detection rate being caused by it's not having hips, pointing to matousec's test as proof of that yet Bit Defender scored worse than Avira on matousec's test.
     
  20. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    2,969
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Again ..... Matousec's test are leak tests. Most Internet Security suites use by default a trust concept either signature and/or user community to determine if an app outbound connection is OK. Also most of these have some type of behavior blocking protection. The only time your going to get an outbound alerts from IS's in this caregory is when the behavior blocker determines an unknown/unsigned app is attempting an outbound connection.

    When a HIPS is part of the IS, most configure or recommend you configure the browser and any other Internet facing apps to untrusted. As such, your going to get an alert when anything outbound attempts a connection.

    Note that almost all Internet suites have an option where you can be prompted for all Internet connections. It is turned off by default. Matousec tests with the default settings set on.
     
  21. hawki

    hawki Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Posts:
    1,957
    Location:
    DC Metro Area
    Hi itman:) Thank you again for trying to educate me on this subject. but that's not what I was confused about. I was confused by someone's explaining Avira's non-stellar detection percentage on the fact that it has no HIPS component who then pointed to matousec's test as evidence of this. What confused me was that the topped rank Bit Defender scored even lower than Avira on Matousec's test so how could the results of matousec's test be used to explain it's relatively low detectection score.
     
  22. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    4,097
  23. AVusah

    AVusah Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Posts:
    274
    As you can see from the test, Avira has fallen behind because of it's poor behavioral detection skills (through its heuristic detection is probably among the best).
     
  24. anon

    anon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    4,097
    As I can see in Heuristic/Behaviour Test (awards list), Avira ranked 7th out of 21.
    It's not so "fallen behind" imho.
     
  25. AVusah

    AVusah Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Posts:
    274
    Avira used to rank in the top 2-3 just a few years ago, as it still does in on-demand scanning tests, when behavior blocking was not as widespread as it is today. Now it gets not-so-impressive scores in AV-C's heuristic and real world tests, as well as pretty disappointing scores in AV-Test tests.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.