They both earned 18 out of a possible 18 points. The Internet security suites from Avira and Kaspersky Lab performed the best in the current test under Windows 8.1. Several years ago, this problem was much worse. While all the other programs in the test had a few more false positives, there were very few annoying false warnings overall. The sentries from Kaspersky Lab, McAfee and Tencent were only near-perfect: they issued one to three false warnings. The suites from Avira, Check Point, Kingsoft and Symantec exhibited not even a single false positive. To do so, in the lab they scanned over 330,000 benign programs, visited 500 virus-free websites and monitored a few dozen installations of applications. Hardly any annoying queriesĪll the suites had to also demonstrate that they are capable of distinguishing between friend and foe. The system watchdog from ThreatTrack slows down the system considerably, that's why it is awarded only 2 points. Windows Defender was doing relatively well at 4.5 points. In this category, the freeware suites from AVG, Avast and Panda earned only 3.5 to 4.5 out of a possible 6 points. And this although the first three had the best scores in malware detection.Īll the other packages have a more or less measurable system load on the PC. The lab awarded the highest point score of 6 to the system watchdogs from Avira, Kaspersky Lab, Bitdefender and Kingsoft, as they put virtually no burden on system resources. Then each of the specified operations was repeated while each particular security suite was running. The execution time was clocked and recorded for all these operations. To do so, web pages were launched, software was downloaded, applications were installed and data was copied on a reference system. That is why the lab evaluated just how heavily the suites impact a system in terms of reduced performance. Users often claim that security applications slow down their Windows 8.1 system under routine conditions. "Does more security mean slower PC performance?" The built-in Windows Defender finished both tests with only 70 and 80% detection rates respectively. Only Avast, Check Point and both products from AVG had problems with this task, detecting only 98 or 99%. And 18 products did in fact score 100% on this task. The reference set with nearly 18,000 malware specimens includes new, along with many known, malware samples that a suite really ought to detect. Overall, that represents 50% of all the products tested. This was followed by Avira, Comodo, G Data, Trend Micro, Avast and Check Point, scoring 99%. The five products from Bitdefender, F-Secure, Kaspersky Lab, Symantec, and even the freeware security program from Panda, managed to score 100% in this category. In the real-world test, the challenge was to detect and remove some 170 select, brand-new malware specimens. That is why over a period of two months, the products in the test were required to withstand the real-world test and the evaluation with the AV-TEST reference set. Excellent detection of malwareĪll users naturally pay close attention to the protection function of the individual products. By comparison: The basic protection of Windows Defender was rated at 10.5 points. The popular freeware security suites from Avast and AVG reached a final tally of 14.5 and 12.5 points respectively. Overall, there are 13 tiers of finishers due to tied results. The first freeware solution from Kingsoft ranked with 17 points at number 3. With 17.5 and 17 points, the solutions from Bitdefender, Symantec, Kingsoft and Trend Micro followed close behind. In the test on the Windows platform 8.1, two products even achieved the maximum 18 points: Avira Antivirus Pro and the Internet Security Suite from Kaspersky Lab. The testers awarded up to six points for each section, thus a maximum of 18 points for all tests. In the lab, all the security suites were evaluated in terms of their protection, system load and usability.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |