- Jul 6, 2015
- 153
Maybe that test is outdated. I've tested it personally and 360 Cloud detection was exceptional.
http://malwaretips.com/threads/samp...rity-essentials-07-07-2015.48090/#post-407955
Avira or BitDefender Engine?
- Thread starter Nikos751
- Start date
- Status
http://malwaretips.com/threads/samp...rity-essentials-07-07-2015.48090/#post-407955
- Jun 14, 2015
- 857
Oops! I read that incorrectly. I got my threads crossed. I was posting past my bedtime. heh...so, yes, my post doesn't even make sense. (Note to self: you aren't 20 years old anymore--Oh wait! I already have that note to self here...) 
I was trying to point out that 360+BD+Avira did have a higher detection rate than QVM alone.
I was trying to point out that 360+BD+Avira did have a higher detection rate than QVM alone.
- Jul 12, 2015
- 30
Avira has a very good file based detection and also light. Bitdefender has a good file based detection yet their better detection is more with behaviour and hips.
If you really want another engine added the Avira with be a better choice, but like someone else said it will slow down your pc with added extra AV engines.
If you really want another engine added the Avira with be a better choice, but like someone else said it will slow down your pc with added extra AV engines.
- Jun 14, 2015
- 857
- Jul 6, 2015
- 153
Cloud is online & QVMII alone is like 5% of total detection. It's likely to be zero offline protection without Avira & BD.
- Apr 3, 2014
- 1,460
I've been testing TSE and the other engines are useless dont use them use only the default engine, it doesnt update its data base normally it is always with a delay.
I'm looking on my install TSE when the last update of the engines was 11-07-015 and we are on the 17th.
I highly recommend to use the older version 360IS until this one will be stable
I'm looking on my install TSE when the last update of the engines was 11-07-015 and we are on the 17th.
I highly recommend to use the older version 360IS until this one will be stable
- Sep 13, 2014
- 874
both are great nad both has FPs ...
Avira is more consistent...
BD has some problems of fps...
you decide.
Avira is more consistent...
BD has some problems of fps...
you decide.
- May 11, 2013
- 1,687
For malware detection and pretty good removal choose Avira.
For false positives detection choose BD.
For false positives detection choose BD.
- Dec 25, 2014
- 1,349
antivirus is really all false positives (obviously) and second I prefirero all engines installed for maximum protection and better.
I do not care if Qihoo has false positives how important is the safety of pc
I do not care if Qihoo has false positives how important is the safety of pc
- Dec 17, 2014
- 1,355
In my opinion I dont think bitdefenders signatures are as good as they used to be so Avira
- Jan 9, 2013
- 1,457
I have 360 TS 7.0.0.51. Avira updates regularly like clockwork.
- Jun 14, 2015
- 857
Are you sure? Mine checks for updates daily but the Avira signatures are still 09 June.
Look at the timestamps in \Program Files (x86)\360\Total Security\deepscan\SDEng\savapi\ and open vbase031.vdf in a text editor:
BD signatures do get updates; cf. \Program Files (x86)\360\Total Security\deepscan\SDEng\bd\Plugins\
Look at the timestamps in \Program Files (x86)\360\Total Security\deepscan\SDEng\savapi\ and open vbase031.vdf in a text editor:
Now compare to http://www.avira.com/en/support-vdf-history
BD signatures do get updates; cf. \Program Files (x86)\360\Total Security\deepscan\SDEng\bd\Plugins\
- Jul 12, 2015
- 30
Do you fully trust 360 regarding with your personal data etc?
- Apr 3, 2014
- 1,460
- Jun 14, 2015
- 857
- Jul 12, 2015
- 30
- Jul 6, 2015
- 153
Saw this on wilderssecurity some time ago. I'm using BD sigs so can't confirm. However, if this happens to be true, users should be informed about this delay in Avira dbs as it might create a major risk in offline protection.
- Status
Similar threads
