Faybert

Level 22
Verified
Malware Hunter
All tests were conducted in protected virtual environment. Due to the small number of samples used in this tests, you should take results with a grain of salt. MalwareTips doesn’t encourage readers to take this test as a proof that tested security product is good or bad as security products are dynamically changing. This test shows how the tested product behaves with certain malware samples, on unique circumstances in given period of time.
Product’s malware detection rate is not an equivalent of protection. This should not be mixed up. MalwareTips encourage you to compare these results with others and take informed decisions on what security products to use.
esse é o melhor de março hein-1.png
 
D

Deleted Member 3a5v73x

having signatures on 20-30% of the samples shows a different outcome compared to the 70%.
the less the AV has to deal with, the better it will perform.
For G Data I'd rather wish every test would be just dynamic, or just with inhouse CloseGap engine enabled, the true potentional and strenghtness of G Data's BB shines then, when it have to handle e.g. 15 out of 20 unknown malicious threats. For educational purposes it's cool to test, but in day-to-day PC usage you won't encounter such case when you'll need to deal with even 10 unknown files at once, unless you're dealing with some friends USB, so by that time G Data would have already caught everything.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mekelek

Level 28
For G Data I'd rather wish every test would be just dynamic, or just with inhouse CloseGap engine enabled, the true potentional and strenghtness of G Data's BB shines then, when it have to handle e.g. 15 out of 20 unknown malicious threats. For educational purposes it's cool to test, but in day-to-day PC usage you won't encounter such case when you'll need to deal with even 10 unknown files at once, unless you're dealing with some friends USB, so by that time G Data would have already caught everything.
GData's BB was not enough in those tests i marked, when signatures weren't available
ofcourse this is probably true for most AVs too.
 
D

Deleted Member 3a5v73x

GData's BB was not enough in those tests i marked, when signatures weren't available
ofcourse this is probably true for most AVs too.
Would you leave Kaspersky too if in next coming tests it's dynamic protection will fail, considering Kaspersky's been solid as rock so far in MH? Asking same for the G Data, who's been doing consistently well in MH. You know that it's a hunt for that 1 sample out of 50/100, that will destroy the system, in the best case, just partialy.
 

mekelek

Level 28
Would you leave Kaspersky too if in next coming tests it's dynamic protection will fail, considering Kaspersky's been solid as rock so far in MH? Asking same for the G Data, who's been doing consistently well in MH. You know that it's a hunt for that 1 sample out of 50/100, that will destroy the system, in the best case, just partialy.
if it were constantly failing and there is a better alternative, i would.
but it didn't, i ran both GData and Kaspersky tests simultanously in 1 to 2 hours after it was shared on the hub.
@harlan4096 has been doing a great job publishing both normal and dynamic only results.

i use what i think is the best, without making compromises, if something pops up to be better than kaspersky, i will be the first to jump ship.
cause after all, the program serves me, and not the other way
 
this is why i'm interested to gdata , i'm wondering if GDATA TS+ NVT EXE V4 will do well my main concerns is to block web threats and outside attacks , because I know how to deal with a malware file for example I can check certs of the exe use cloud scanner to check files
 
  • Like
Reactions: mekelek
D

Deleted Member 3a5v73x

if it were constantly failing and there is a better alternative, i would.
but it didn't, i ran both GData and Kaspersky tests simultanously in 1 to 2 hours after it was shared on the hub.
@harlan4096 has been doing a great job publishing both normal and dynamic only results.

i use what i think is the best, without making compromises, if something pops up to be better than kaspersky, i will be the first to jump ship.
cause after all, the program serves me, and not the other way
Yeah, well, to top Kaspersky off the throne, you need some special weapons, two completely different AV suites which shouldn't be compared, after all G Data is good and fair competitor, taking into account a fact how much it struggled before and where it is at now and improvements made to it over the last updates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mekelek

mekelek

Level 28
Yeah, well, to top Kaspersky off the throne, you need some special weapons, two completely different AV suites which shouldn't be compared, after all G Data is good and fair competitor, taking into account a fact how much it struggled before and where it is at now and improvements made to it.
yes you're absolutely right, i remember trying GData a year ago, it was nothing like it is now. if they keep improving it, it can fight the big guys.
i just wish they picked avira sigs instead of bitdefender, it was hilarious checking the samples and seeing their own signatures being added 1 by 1.
i guess it's some rivalry bs since both avira and gdata are from germany