VB RAP Test December 2010 through June 2011

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by King Grub, Jun 25, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
  2. Matthijs5nl

    Matthijs5nl Guest

    Expected results, I think, Coranti and Trustport the best with multiple engines. Personally I am happy with the results.

    Some things: G Data and especially Emsisoft not as great as they did before.
    Very nice BullGuard results

    In my eyes you could draw a line between AVG/Sophos/Symantec and Nifty/Webroot. Everything right/top of the line is good (some unknowns to me: Softscan, ZeoBit, UnThreat, Microsafe, Bkis; I wouldn't buy any of them [also not Qihoo]) and everything left/down of the line is sh*t.

    Who can explain the huge difference between Comodo AV and Comodo IS?
     
  3. cruelsister

    cruelsister Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Posts:
    976
    Location:
    Paris
    I have to totally take exception to the results. As you may remember, Trustport has consistently rated very high in these tests. Seeing this I considered switching, but before I did I ran my usual trial test- once weekly for 4 weeks I ran between 15-20 malware links (from the usual sources) against Trustport. In every case detection ranged between 60-70%, a far cry from the 99+ that is touted for this product.

    Although it is obvious that VB will use many more samples to get their results than I did, for me to randomly find those malware files that Trustport did not detect (0.2%) seems very improbable. I know that most everyone here scoffs at Utube reviews, but for some odd reason the results there mirror mine.
     
  4. clayieee

    clayieee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2011
    Posts:
    261
    Way to go G Data.
     
  5. Nevis

    Nevis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Posts:
    786
    Location:
    255.255.255.255
    cannot found trend micro ?
     
  6. Duradel

    Duradel Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Posts:
    363
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Pretty much all of the companies in the top right did well. The stand outs are probably Bullguard and Avira. Coranti & Trustport did well with their multi AV scanners but I find their resource usage and pricing per year to rule them out completely.
     
  7. toxinon12345

    toxinon12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Posts:
    1,200
    Location:
    Managua, Nicaragua
    All other vendors had improved their detection rates
    congratulations, they have made a progress :)
     
  8. Frank the Perv

    Frank the Perv Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Posts:
    882
    Location:
    Virginia, USA
    Surprised to see Lavasoft do so well.

    Good result for Kaspersky.

    Is McAfee ever going to come back and be good again?
     
  9. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
    Lavasoft uses G Data as engine, which in turn uses Bitdefender and Avast, so it shouldn't be a surprise than Lavasoft and G Data results are similar.
     
  10. Sjoeii

    Sjoeii Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Posts:
    1,240
    Location:
    52?18'51.59"N + 4?56'32.13"O
    Wow, Bullguard is doing great as well
     
  11. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    Wow, good to see companies performing.

    The only weird thing is that if i remember correctly EAM used to be at top :rolleyes:
    What could have happened :eek:
     
  12. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    20,956
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Removed Post. Please check a Web site's policy before posting copyrighted materials. In their Terms and Conditions page, it states:
     
  13. Spruce

    Spruce Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Posts:
    291
    Avast surprised me a little bit, not to chabby results ;)
     
  14. PeZzy

    PeZzy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2011
    Posts:
    50
    I'm a little suspicious about Bullguard's position on that chart as they seemed to have leaped from mediocrity to the top of the heap in just a couple of months.

    Does anyone actually use Coranti and Trustport? My main computer is fast with SSDs and those programs grind it to a halt.

    BTW...this test is for Windows 2008.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2011
  15. bellgamin

    bellgamin Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Posts:
    5,648
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Among the also-rans that I am watching ---
    +Fortinet's freebie: This is an AV+FW combo. 80-85 percentile & climbing. Updates sigs often. Ran light when I trialed it. Good intrusion blocking. It's worth keeping an eye on IMO.
     
  16. Blueshoes

    Blueshoes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Posts:
    220
    I question this organizations tests most of the time. When I do my own tests, my finding seem more in line with AV-Comparitives. But then again, AV-Comparatives is the gold standard of AV testing.
     
  17. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,075
    I agree with you, and I have done many times what cruelsister said in his post with the same conclusion.

    Bkis http://www.bkis.com/home.aspx in the top 5? I have never heard about this Vietnamese av

    And bullguard using Bitdefender engine score much better... I can't understand why bitdefender licenses their engine to everybody if they perform worse.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2011
  18. AvinashR

    AvinashR Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    Posts:
    2,060
    Location:
    New Delhi Metallo β-Lactamase 1
    There are two Anti-Virus companies in Vietnam. CMC Infosec and BKAV Corporation.
     
  19. Duradel

    Duradel Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Posts:
    363
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Aren't the pro-active results the ones you should be comparing for your test? Reactive would be after the program scans the files on your computer.
     
  20. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    @cruelsister: That's probably because they don't test it with just recent malware.

    Although the quality isn't as good as AV-C, I do appreciate the sheer quantity of products tested by VB.
     
  21. toxinon12345

    toxinon12345 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Posts:
    1,200
    Location:
    Managua, Nicaragua
    uhm, to what quality do you refer?
     
  22. Nevis

    Nevis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Posts:
    786
    Location:
    255.255.255.255
  23. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    After reading some posts here, there is a huge ? in my mind.
    So much inconsistency in the results :ninja: o_O
     
  24. PJC

    PJC Very Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,959
    Location:
    Internet
    +1. :thumb:
     
  25. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    First of all, there is no internet connection. Unacceptable nowadays.
    Secondly, AV-C reports show much more detail and information (at least for free).
    Lastly, AV-C has a history of quality reports, while VB has been criticized (and rightly so) like in the link by Nevis.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.