What AV after NAV

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Gin, Jun 1, 2003.

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

    Gin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2003
    Posts:
    16
    hi there!


    well, could you help me to clarify the situation:
    F-secure seems ( according to the latest tests) ranked #1 ; another benefit: it handles virus AND other malwares, right?

    so, checking the latest posts, people here often recommend KAV, RAV, dr Webb....NOD ( no sort); I'm sure that these AV are top, but it seeems me that f-secure is not appreciated as it should, according to tests, so is there any cons that i don't know...?

    here : Win XP, 512 RAM, TDS 3 and NAV, ( never had a prob...as far as I know), but I really dislike the future policy of Symantec activation and I won't renew with them...so I try to find another AV


    Thanks for your advice
     
  2. wizard

    wizard Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    818
    Location:
    Europe - Germany - Duesseldorf
    Which tests you are refering to? If you really look in the figures for F-Secure you will find that in comparison to other well performing scanners the advantage of F-Secure is only "theoretical".

    F-Secure is a product that is designed mostly to meet companies needs instead of home users (usability, features, etc).

    If you are refering here to (backdoor-) trojans it has an advantage to other scanners because it uses the Kaspersky engine.

    IMHO one of the above is a better choice for home users.

    As I mentioned earlier it is designed mainly for companies. Also if you really look in the details you will find out that the overall good performance of F-Secure relates back only to one part: the KAV engine.

    If you already use TDS-3 you are good protected against (backdoor-)trojans. So no real need to have an av that covers this area as well. So that gives you a wider range of products that you can consider. So why not give NOD32 a try? According to the tests of VirusBulettin it performance better on ITW viruses than F-Secure. :)

    wizard
     
  3. Gin

    Gin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2003
    Posts:
    16
    Thanks Wizard for your answer...

    when i talked /tests, I thought of the latest tests results posted here:

    New VirusP AV-test 5-2003 (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=9385)
    or
    New Virus Test by GEGA IT-Solutions (av-test.org) (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=8294)

    and latest Virus Bulletin tests are good too

    yes i've seen that f-secure uses the kav engine, but not only this one if I'm right; anyway in these latest tests, it always performs, slightly, better than KAV, and doesn't use too much resources, (KAV seems well known for it), so...o_O?

    seems strange 'cuz I downloaded the 1 month trial since a couple of days, and F-secure 5.41 seems very simple and stable (kinda install and forget) with my config (TDS, ZAP, PestPatrol <- I know this latest is not very efficient, but it does the cookie management and other little things I want)

    I hope so :)
    but, frankly speaking, I never caught a trojan/backdoor with TDS....NAV got them all before any warning of TDS, and the HDrives check with TDS didn't find any....say I'm lucky

    for the moment I see only 1 problem : F-secure is not very cheap...

    thanks again wizard....
     
  4. wizard

    wizard Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    818
    Location:
    Europe - Germany - Duesseldorf
    The advantage of the second (F-Prot) engine in F-Secure is only as I mentioned before a theoretical advantage. Same applies to AVK (uses RAV in addition). I've been watching this since years in different tests: If you scan a large collection of (zoo) malware you will notice a slight difference but if it comes to pratical (ITW) scenarios there is hardly the change that you gain some advantage through a second engine besides KAV.

    F-Secure should be slower than KAV due to scanning with 2 engines. I know a lot of people that are telling that KAV uses too much resources but all I can tell you is that KAV 4 performance well on my old C433 computer. :)

    wizard
     
Loading...
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.