The Best 2012 Security Suites according to PCMAG

[Jack]

Almost all of the major security vendors have released their 2012 security suites already, counting both those with "2012" in the name and those released since the first 2012 edition appeared. Their prices range from under $40 to almost $90, but the most expensive aren't necessarily the most effective. Even though quite a few haven't been updated yet, a couple of clear winners have emerged—though the late releases could surprise me.

For the moment, however, Norton Internet Security 2012 ($69.99 direct for three licenses, 4.5 stars) excels in all areas, with no component rating less than four stars. Even in areas like spam filtering and parental control, weak points for many suites, Norton does a great job. And its smart firewall protects against a wide variety of attacks.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Complete ($79.95 direct for three licenses, 4.5 stars) is this season's breakout success. Totally rewritten, its core components occupy less than 600KB of disk space. In my testing Webroot achieved a first-ever perfect score for malware blocking. And its online backup and file synchronization goes way beyond almost all of the competition. Webroot and Norton currently share the Editors' Choice honor for security suites.

Read more>>

As you can see on the above table , NIS 2012 and Webroot SecureAnywhere Complete got the Editor Choice award.
What's really hard to understand is how McAfee Total Protection 2012 manage to get 4 stars while the suites from Kaspersky , F-Secure , VIPRE , G-DATA , ESET only managed to get 3 stars or less...
[attachment=929]

 

[I3rYcE]

Woww.NIS is very good antivirus but I am big fan for avast .

 

[McLovin]

Woww.NIS is very good antivirus but I am big fan for avast .

Agreed Norton is a very good suite. No other really comes close to Norton.

 

[Deleted member 178]

Strange I saw many test of webroot SA and its detection were not so great. Maybe I should test it again.

 

[3link9]

I love Norton and Kaspersky and for webroot when i tested it..... it failed..... like failed. It didn't detect any of my Zero day's and for its regular detection.....it did okay but not good enough and I tested it about a week ago. I don't understand why it scored pretty well in PCmag. I also looked at other user reviews and it also failed pretty bad. So..... Yeah..... Bitdefender has been doing pretty well too and why does Panda global protection score low, It did amazing in my test and some other users.

 

[DiabloBlack]

There are a lot of good products out there. I bet if you tweak the settings on some of these suites you may get better results. The article doesn't really say, but these were probably tested with their default install options. Glad to see NIS still performing well.

 

[malbky]

I do not believe these pc mag guys. And kaspersky is not worth 3 or 3.5stars.Eset is also pretty good. But yet those reviews are good and help in comparison.

 

[jamescv7]

NIS definitely would be the editor choice, since with the pros of light, easy to use and superb detection/performance. A must have for any users who have budget.

 

[MrXidus]

I take these results with a huge grain of salt... Don't believe them. But thanks for the share.

 

[Deleted member 178]

I take these results with a huge grain of salt...

Me too ^^

 

[jamescv7]

For PC Mag their test isn't not biased but not accurate at all so need more than second opinion to determine the test.

 

[samit]

Mcafee 4 stars really:huh:.......it is one of the worst security suites ever:dodgy:

 

[win7holic]

I agree with MrXidus, I also do not believe them.
thanks for share

I am not exaggerate the problem.
but, why McAfee with a big installer and not a good detection rate (below average) can get 4 stars?
is there play behind the scenes of this test?

 

[LochNess]

I'm not surprised at PCmag's review of Webroot... Last year, they claimed that Webroot's A/V was the best...

'Tongue in Cheek' might be the approach for most A/V tests... too many variables in methodology, along with possible incentives... JMO

I simply peruse and catalog with other tests including those submitted by independents (i.e., MalwareTips Forum)... I appreciate those submitted on forum... Thanks for you effort and hard work 'Folks'... keep those VM's 'fired up'

 

[WinAndLinuxTutorials]

I won't believe that rating which was given to McAfee. I would even prefer a free program over it.

 

[Jack]

I actually think that PCMAG give these rating based mostly on the product features/components , for instance McAfee got 4 starts because it had included a back-up feature.......
I was looking at the latest Av-test results and Webroot SA Complete only got a 3.5 out 6 points in the detection field so it pretty much failed ...with this in mind I can safely say that PCMag didn't do a conclusive malware test but just a product overview...