why does avira always do so bad in other tests

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by zfactor, Nov 3, 2007.

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

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    it does well in avcomparatives but almost every other test i see it does poor.. on the russian sites and german sites it always seems to be at the back of the pack? what is different from avcomp to the other tests out there?? im wondering why 1 tests always shows a good performance from avira and other show so poorly?? thanks
     
  2. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,818
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    in almost all german magazines (tests done by av-test.de) avira scores good. not just at av-comparatives.
     
  3. Leo2005

    Leo2005 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Posts:
    179
    Location:
    Braunschweig (Germany)
    which test do you mean? i do know only test where avira reaches the top 3.

    i wouldn't give many on russian tests. These tests show only russian scanners at the top (with Kaspersky as the best one).

    i would say have a look at the report done by av-comparatives called "Anti-Virus Testing Websites" there you can see which tests you can trust and which not.
     
  4. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Avira is one of the best on the market. Period.
     
  5. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    why do people just assume these are 'detection tests'
     
  6. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    id have to find them again but after doing some google research and translating them ive seen a lot of web sites from russia and germany that say avira is not that great. but they also at the same time say nod is not that great either. these are mainly russian web sites also but i did see a few german ones saying the same thing..
     
  7. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Unusual. Over the last couple of years the Avira engine has been top/near the top on a variety of testing sites for detection. The two most "reliable" testing sites, av-comparatives and av-test.org have placed Avira near the top in recent tests.

    Maybe your sites refer to cleaning ability?
     
  8. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    not sure... is the cleaning ability bad with avira in anyone's opinion then? thanks for all the info here guys. wilders is a great place
     
  9. Arup

    Arup Guest

    Avira's detection and cleaning rates are quite good and am yet to see a site give it thumbs down for either.
     
  10. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    prove it,

    isnt that what people usually say :)

    very bold comments to make with no proof in the posting.

    ---
    i expect to see av-comp and av-test posted, but this only proves its detection.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2007
  11. waters

    waters Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Posts:
    934
    Avira is one of the best on the market,if not the best
     
  12. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    ok, lets change direction...

    why is it?
     
  13. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    in terms of detection rates Avira is very good. :)
    I have plenty of new samples daily and Avira picks very often the highest percent of them... BD and KAV are not so far away, but still Avira defeats them right now.

    But anyway av-comparatives.org and av-test + VB show the same thing, and perhaps all AV vendors agree that these 3 are the best testers.
     
  14. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    avira has a great detection rate but if you look at the avira forum you will see its not very good at cleaning.
    lodore
     
  15. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    even on this forum, avira remains the highest posted 'problem av'

    buggy.
     
  16. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    my sister had it installed for around a year and it wasnt to bad.
    the sechdular did brake but avira fourm helped fix it.
    lodore
     
  17. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    Avast
    missed 38482 samples (av-comparatives)
    408027 samples cleaned (53% removal - anti-malware.ru)
    = 400317 samples that are unprotected.

    AVG Anti-Malware

    missed 18184 samples (av-comparatives)
    371375 samples cleaned (47% removal anti-malware.ru)
    = 436969 samples that are unprotected


    Avira

    missed 4468 samples (av-comparatives)
    192930 samples cleaned (24% removal anti-malware.ru)
    = 615414 samples that are unprotected

    as you can see, detection means squat without removal

    want me to continue for the rest?

    ----------
    for curiosity sake....

    Dr.Web
    missed 81863 samples (av-comparatives)
    595714 samples cleaned (82% removal anti-malware.ru)
    = 212630 samples that are unprotected


    well, well.... well.

    -----
    Kaspersky
    missed 12420 samples (av-comparatives)
    565106 samples cleaned (71% removal anti-malware.ru)
    *243238 samples that are unprotected

    *KIS has PDM which will stop them if they try anything.

    just for you lodore... lol

    its definatly a different way to look at things, instead of 99.9656% detection.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2007
  18. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    thanks Chris:D
    im quite surprised at dr web cleaning rate.
    i didnt know it was that good.
    is that the 4.33 or 4.44 version?
    lodore
     
  19. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    4.44 current version,

    so until more removal tests arrive, i aint too worried when people say 89 or 92% detection from drweb is not good enough.

    people are using these tests to promote their product, especially here on wilders,

    especially as drweb was the 'only av' to successfully remove the complicated rootkit.

    but at the moment, i aint too worried. :D

    i know its not foolproof, but its still a different and probably more accurate way to look at things lodore, i mean ... what really is the point of an av stating 'your computer is infected' if it really does nothing to help the situation and protect the computer?
     
  20. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Only if you choose to let yourself get infected even after your AV detects and warns you about the malware. :rolleyes:
     
  21. interstate ron

    interstate ron Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    Posts:
    65
    Location:
    over the hill from West "By God"
    Chris,you make very very good point!
     
  22. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543

    Says who ? Do you have any reliable source to back that up ?
     
  23. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i know i do, but thank you for the comment.

    do you agree?

    ;)

    you never 'choose' to let malware infect your machine, the malware will do whatever it wants, if the threat has not been removed.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2007
  24. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    lots of people, and yes they are mainly avira users.

    yourself is one, but do you NOW see how these constant links to these 'detection' tests, dont really backup your claim.

    look at the situation in a different perspective

    people just love to see figures and percentages, but its no real reflection on the situation of what an AV is for, protection.
     
  25. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Oh really? In which case you might be interested in telling me what is malware doing on your system if your AV could detect it to begin with, user stupidity notwithstanding.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.