AV-Comparatives AV-Comparatives Performance Test - April 2024

[CyberDevil]

26 декабря 2023 г. Он обновляется незаметно, и я считаю, что вам придется переустановить его вручную, чтобы обновить движок.

Download Panda Free Antivirus (Panda Dome)

Download Panda Free Antivirus (Panda Dome) 22.02.01 - Handy and approachable antivirus solution that uses cloud assistance to prevent, detect and eliminate infected files while remaining light on resources

www.softpedia.com

As I recall, Panda has been version 22 for a few years now. The 22.00 - 22.02.01 changes should mean super minor changes at the interface level. At least all the developers I know follow these rules. Are you aware of them changing anything drastically?

 

[Jonny Quest]

And personally, I would not want to go to a "3rd party" website to get my AV program updates. Panda can keep chewing on his bamboo, as far as I'm concerned

 

[Trident]

As I recall, Panda has been version 22 for a few years now. The 22.00 - 22.02.01 changes should mean super minor changes at the interface level. At least all the developers I know follow these rules. Are you aware of them changing anything drastically?

Eventually in the cloud something may have changed and they introduced several a’la bloatware features, but other than that, nothing has changed. There are no notes or articles about improvements either. Panda is just abandonware at that point. Not sure how long they will keep milking this cow.

In terms of WatchGuard, all the changes are just on console and management, nothing mentioned about improved protection.

 

[Digmoons]

After comparing this and the previous report, probably one of the biggest reasons for these differences is the fact that they've switched the benchmarking software from PC Mark to Procyon.

 

[TairikuOkami]

After comparing this and the previous report, probably one of the biggest reasons for these differences is the fact that they've switched the benchmarking software from PC Mark to Procyon.

That really proves that those tests are subjective, they basically switched PC and we got different results. It is a nice comparison, but pretty much useless, there are too many variables.

 

[SeriousHoax]

After comparing this and the previous report, probably one of the biggest reasons for these differences is the fact that they've switched the benchmarking software from PC Mark to Procyon.

That really proves that those tests are subjective, they basically switched PC and we got different results. It is a nice comparison, but pretty much useless, there are too many variables.

Aren't the AVC score and Procyon Score two different things? Same in their previous tests where it was PC Mark because if you look at the AVC score, then Avast/AVG and Avira are 4th, 5th and 6th. But if you look at their Procyon Score, their average is 90.7 which is the lowest of any other products tested.
So, I think the AVC metrics and Procyon metrics are different. The impact score is related to the AVC score, not Procyon.
I'm rather confused how come Avast/AVG and Avira got such low score on Procyon. Avast and AVG are the same thing so I can understand that but Avira's core product is completely different with different engines, different behavior blocker, etc. yet they got the same score.

Anyway, these tests gives a base idea but a user should always test products on their own system to find out which is light on their system. For example, if Microsoft Defender was really light for everyone at common things like app launching as the test here shows, then I wouldn't have to put these files on my system to Defender's exclusions. MD is the only AV that makes these apps start with a delay. I'm not even mentioning the random delays it causes in some other operations. A couple of these apps still have slight delays even after adding them to exclusions (MD was on default settings, not tweaked). There are many users on this forum who woudn't have installed a third-party AV if Microsoft Defender was lighter. So ultimately how a product performs on your own system matters more than any test conducted by anyone.

 

[ForgottenSeer 109138]

This is why it's important to tell users when they ask what's best, that it depends upon their system specs, what apps they use and how and their knowledge level/experience of security apps, as all these variables are important as to determine. What one user experiences with a particular application another may or may not.

It's important to set aside 'pushes of favorite software" to help other users determine what's best "for them".

 

[monkeylove]

Complications arise if you try to do tests yourself on a computer that you need to use. That means you'll need a second computer just like what you're using, then copy and backup your system to the second computer, then test there. For testing, you need to install the AV and run the benchmark several times, then remove the system and restore it from the backup, then install and test the second AV, etc.

If that's not doable, then you'll have to rely on "useless" tests from companies and people who can do such.