Avast 6.0.1203.0

Don't you just love the scanning speed Avast! combined with a brand new SSD gets:

 

Holy shniz. O.O

 

Yup! Avast scanning on a Crucial M4 256 GB SSD. So far, Avast is the only anti-malware software that can actually deliver the speeds of an SSD. All other (Emsisoft, Avira, ESET, Norton etc, I've tried them all) seems to be capped at 10-15 mb/s.

Avast truly is amazing performance-wise.

 

Modify scan settings (Full scan, quick scan) for thorough scanning (enable scanning of all file/archive types, don't enable "scan whole files", disable caching) and you'll probably see different results.
avast by default doesn't scan a lot of file types, but it count's them as processed and takes them into account for the "Speed" value. So if you have a 700 MB 7zip archive (which aren't scanned by default) it will "scan" (skip, actually) it in a second, thus the 700MB/s value.

 

Still, with SSD, you do see such speedups. avast! has a super high speed scan engine but in most cases slow HDD is heavily restricting it. Archives or not, it doesn't matter, if you stick a SSD in it it will fly. I'm getting insane speeds even on netbook now and my SSD only maxes out at 120MB/s sequential because of the netbook restrictions, otherwise it's a 500MB/s drive.

 

Nice to know, thx

 

Here's a screenshot of a scan on Windows only (and without those 7zip archives). The speeds are still amazing (even though I'm not using the latest SATA-platform);

 

i wondering what super monster of computer do you have in which the CPU and RAM can process such amount of load.

i would copy the SQL developer, the JDK and some ISO to see if it unpack and scan such files fast

over factors such as not scanning all file extensions, not unpacking the archives to a deep level, not using max heuristics, skipping files in cache and skipping files in the whitelist built by avast developers

 

Well, it doesn't really matter. The engine is designed for 100% protection without any compromises. Scanning archives won't make any difference unless your system is a gateway. In which case you won't be using home edition of the product which is essentially designed to protect workstations.
Thoroughly scanning massive video files is also pointless as they aren't infectable. However in latest iterations, avast! features an improved video files scan engine which checks critical parts of the videos and skips the actual video content. This means that it will still thoroughly check part of the video that may contain scripts and other data (like in WMV files), but will skip the rest of the file which will ALWAYS be clean. Scanning such file which is usually 700MB in an instant will result in 700MB/s throughput. Do you think the reported speed is not correct? It did check a 700MB file thoroughly. Same applies to cached stuff. It did check 700MB file even though the end verdict was that file was already scanned and hasn't been modified since and VPS hasn't updated in between.
Though you still have to take the number as a raw statistic number and not an exact precise value to make any conclusens based on it alone.
The fact still remains that numbers will be significantly higher when using SSD drive. The engine is fast but it's often restricted by the speed of HDD where it doesn't really make much difference what you count or not to the MB/s number if the same system can make 3x higher values on the same computer with same settings of avast! by just replacing HDD with SSD drive.

 

"Scanning such file which is usually 700MB in an instant will result in 700MB/s throughput"

could you unpack a 700 MB RAR archive in just a second using WinRAR?

Avast 10x faster than RAR Labs algorithm. Funny.

As i always say, "testing is easy, but good testing is difficult"

 

He didnt say that

Anyway Avast is very good

 

I think you have interpreted Rejzor's statement in the opposite way that I did.
I thought he meant indicated "700MB/s throughput".

 

What difference does it make? I scan a large set of unpacked files and I get 120 mb/s throughput (my SSD could actually go up to 550 mb/s but I'm stuck on SATA-2 which restrics my SSD from operating at higher speeds) when using Avast! With other vendors' solutions I get at maximum 15 mb/s throughput when scanning unpacked set of files.

 

By the way, how effective is the Avast sandbox included in the premium version on an x64 system? A year ago, it was terrible according to many reports here at Wilders. Has it been improved by a lot?

 

Well good question.For instance in Avast log.have one message as"Autosandbox candidate: C:\Program Files (x86)\Winamp\winampa.exe
[Source: ]
[Opened by: C:\Windows\SysWOW64\runonce.exe]
--> Result: Not sandboxing (based on user's decision)."
I didn't take any decision,i was never asked aboit this
System:Windows 7/64k

 

even when winamp is a well known program this is flagged by auto-sandbox. (i noted this under x86)

So that feature does not work in x64?

 

It doesn`t work in x 64.I don't understand why avast said that was a user's decision not putting winamp in sand.I didn't asked about this

 

So what you're saying is that the sandbox is flawed in x64 Windows?

 

I don't have till now any problem with sandbox,only the wrong log about winamp
(w7/64k)

 

Ah, yes. But is it as good as the sandbox would be on a 32-bit system, I wonder?

 

1203 here on 5 computers but no program is perfect and it will cause problems on some machines.

 

Works perfectly fine on 64bit OS. It doesn't work on WinXP 64bit edition though (most security programs are very limited on that OS).

 

ah thanks