AV-Comparatives Real-World Protection Test March 2015

Shran said:
I've only used Avira once or twice in VMs so I cannot speak for it, but each time I've used Kaspersky on an actual machine, it slowed it to the point of being unusable; and I'm not talking about some old slow poke XP machine either. I gave Kaspersky several chances, each and every time it either crashed the system or made it unusable (or almost unusable). I'm not saying it doesn't have great protection, it does, I just simply won't ever use it because of the multiple system gunk-ups it caused.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't exactly call Kaspersky light but I used it's trial once while I was traveling in China and I the load is quite manageable. The only points of slow down that I can remember would be when you plug in a flash drive and it goes to auto scan it, and another thing is when it's downloading and applying an update. But bitdefender has the same issues so I wouldn't consider it to be a huge flaw
 
  • Like
Reactions: serzt
Actually, Avira is not bad at all. It has no zero-day capabilities maybe but it has very good Heuristic and signatures than other free AVs. Maybe Avira Free has the best signatures on the free market area. PUP/PUA detections are great on this product. If a file is unknown by APC..the Avira Free uploads the file to cloud (only executable files uploaded, good for privacy) The cloud analyze takes 10 seconds and results come. It will be good or bad.
Avira products are decent antivirus with its Avira Protection Cloud. It needs zero knowledge and configuration.
In my opinion, Avira is the best free antivirus. These are my latest experiences on latest Avira Free build.
On surfing web, Avira Launcher offers Avira Browser Security and it is not bad on malicious-phishing URL blocking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sr. Normal, jamescv7, Piteko21 and 2 others
I think the best bet is ESET;)
analyzing the percentages of of false positives, ESET gets the 4th or 5th place.
But Avira has really very good signatures, yet that does not have high-efficiency on zero-day malware and this can be a serious problem.

a curious fact: AVG beat MCAFEE:D

in these graphs we always have to take the percentage of false positives to have a rigorous analysis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sr. Normal
I have used Kaspersky for 3-4yrs and it's never let me down, I have heard it slows down people's computers, but I have yet to experience it. But I have 42GB of RAM so probably won't.
 
Secondmineboy said:
Yep, Avira is really bad in Zero-Day malwares.

Im thinking about heading to Emsisoft or Kaspersky, depending how theyre getting in their next versions.

Avast is already developing on stuff for their 2016 versions, i would like to know what it is.
Click to expand...

Does Avira's firewall allow users to manually add rules every time a program tries to access Internet?
I tried using Avira firewall but I suppose the firewall is not fully interactive or am I wrong?
 
serzt said:
Does Avira's firewall allow users to manually add rules every time a program tries to access Internet?
I tried using Avira firewall but I suppose the firewall is not fully interactive or am I wrong?
Click to expand...
Avira has no firewall actually. Avira just controls the Windows Firewall.
You can configure Windows firewall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: serzt, Piteko21 and starchild76
have tried avira free many , many moons ago. did not like it. it always had problems with updating.
 
Klipsh said:
The test is reported to Avira free or Pro ?
Click to expand...
It is Pro version and AV-Comparatives used old release!
Current, up to date Avira version is 15.0.9.504, they tested 14..
lzVhBWR.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: LabZero
as AVIRA PRO user I only say that AVIRA pro and free are good, very good signatures, good web blocking plus lighter in system the problem is zero day protection that is almost none.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LabZero
Piteko21 said:
as AVIRA PRO user I only say that AVIRA pro and free are good, very good signatures, good web blocking plus lighter in system the problem is zero day protection that is almost none.
Click to expand...

Avira free + Comodo firewall would probably be good combo.

For me it's not worth the trouble as I am not trying to protect my system, but instead trying to expose AV vulnerabilities and report them.

Besides I am not high risk user... l spend all my time at MT. So in reality Windows Defender + Firewall + Guest Account more than enough probably.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Piteko21 and yigido
Tony Cole said:
I have used Kaspersky for 3-4yrs and it's never let me down, I have heard it slows down people's computers, but I have yet to experience it. But I have 42GB of RAM so probably won't.
Click to expand...
Guess everyone should get on and download more RAM :p:D
 
I doesn't matter if you have 8 or 64 GB of RAM. As long as there is no shortage, Kaspersky won't run any smoother with excess empty RAM.
 
hjlbx said:
Sometimes it seems that, while an AV vendor may use a leased scan engine, the signatures may not be identical. They might be older.

That issue might be due to logistics, lease agreement terms, etc, etc.

This sort of issue has been raised regarding the detection differences between two vendors that lease the same scan engine.

Who know why that is...
Click to expand...
That's simple.
One company paid more money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 21043
Why doesn't the test include more alternatives like Comodo,GDATA,Dr. Web,Norton and Webroot?
 
serzt said:
Why doesn't the test include more alternatives like Comodo,GDATA,Dr. Web,Norton and Webroot?
Click to expand...
Either they weren't accepted in the test or they did not apply/pay to be involved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

You may also like...