Petrovic

Level 63
Verified
Joined
Apr 25, 2013
Messages
5,285
#1


When I challenged Trend Micro to protect a virtual machine test system from my current collection of malware samples, it wiped out 66 percent of them on sight. It whacked quite a few more when I tried to launch them. Its detection rate of 89 percent and overall score of 8.9 put it in between F-Secure Internet Security 2015 and Bitdefender Total Security 2015.

I tested the product's ability to block malicious URLs using newly-discovered URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas. When initially tested, Trend Micro's 80 percent blocking rate for malicious URLs was a new high score. However, a few days later it was deposed by McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015, which blocked 85 percent. Both scores are impressive, given that the current average is 32 percent.Symantec Norton Security, tested simultaneously with Trend Micro, managed to block 51 percent.

A full scan of my standard test system took just 20 minutes. Because Trend Micro avoids re-scanning files already found to be safe, a repeat scan finished in less than a minute.

Trend Micro's impressive handling of malicious URLs also carried over to my test of its phishing protection ability. Its detection rate lagged just 4 percentage points behind that of Norton. Very few products come close to Norton's fraud detection rate.

Small Performance Hit
I wondered whether the additional installation of the password manager, safe browser, vault, and especially SafeSync would make this suite more of a resource eater than Trend Micro's entry level suite. In fact, its scores in my performance tests were the same, within a percent or two.

My boot time test, which measures the time from the start of the boot process (as reported by Windows) until the system is ready for use took 31 percent longer with this suite installed than with no suite. Given that most people rarely reboot more than once per day, this probably won't be noticeable.

A script that moves and copies many large files took 7 percent longer with Trend Micro watching. That's actually a bit better than the current average of 9 percent. And another script that repeatedly zips and unzips those files took 13 percent longer, just a little above the current average of 10 percent.

There are definitely suites with lower overall impact. Webroot's average impact across my three tests was just 3 percent. F-Secure and Bitdefender averaged 4 percent. Even so, I doubt you'll be able to perceive any system slowdown after installing Trend Micro.

Sub-Ratings:
Note: These sub-ratings contribute to a product's overall star rating, as do other factors, including ease of use in real-world testing, bonus features, and overall integration of features.
Firewall: n/a
Antivirus:

Performance:

Antispam:

Privacy:

Parental Control:


Full Article
 
S

Sr. Normal

Guest
#4
As good as Malware Test or Manzai or Nsm0220 ?.
Here we are accustomed to very high quality.
a greeting
 

Cch123

Level 7
Verified
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
331
#5
As good as Malware Test or Manzai or Nsm0220 ?.
Here we are accustomed to very high quality.
a greeting
I think he does it better because of the resources he has access to. Firstly, he has direct contact with the employees of the antivirus he is testing, which can clear up any confusion etc. Secondly, instead of just testing a short list of some random malware URL, he is supplied by MRG Effitas, where the URLs are extremely fresh and he test a 100 of them.

Though I must admit that he should reveal the source of his malware pack to be more credible.

Cheers.
 
Likes: normalizerx

McLovin

Level 72
AV-Tester
Verified
Joined
Apr 17, 2011
Messages
8,784
Operating System
Windows 10
Antivirus
Trend Micro
#7
I have all products of Trend on, their password manager, SafeSync. As for their parental controls, they are in a separate program called Trend Micro Online Guardian. As for a firewall it has a built in Windows Firewall booster, which strengthens the firewall. As for performance, I guess it depends on the machine you have, having a decent PC and RAM etc, you won't experience compared to others.

Great review none the less!
 
Likes: Petrovic

JAMESWT

Level 38
Verified
Joined
Apr 7, 2014
Messages
2,739
#8


When I challenged Trend Micro to protect a virtual machine test system from my current collection of malware samples, it wiped out 66 percent of them on sight. It whacked quite a few more when I tried to launch them. Its detection rate of 89 percent and overall score of 8.9 put it in between F-Secure Internet Security 2015 and Bitdefender Total Security 2015.

I tested the product's ability to block malicious URLs using newly-discovered URLs supplied by MRG-Effitas. When initially tested, Trend Micro's 80 percent blocking rate for malicious URLs was a new high score. However, a few days later it was deposed by McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2015, which blocked 85 percent. Both scores are impressive, given that the current average is 32 percent.Symantec Norton Security, tested simultaneously with Trend Micro, managed to block 51 percent.

A full scan of my standard test system took just 20 minutes. Because Trend Micro avoids re-scanning files already found to be safe, a repeat scan finished in less than a minute.

Trend Micro's impressive handling of malicious URLs also carried over to my test of its phishing protection ability. Its detection rate lagged just 4 percentage points behind that of Norton. Very few products come close to Norton's fraud detection rate.

Small Performance Hit
I wondered whether the additional installation of the password manager, safe browser, vault, and especially SafeSync would make this suite more of a resource eater than Trend Micro's entry level suite. In fact, its scores in my performance tests were the same, within a percent or two.

My boot time test, which measures the time from the start of the boot process (as reported by Windows) until the system is ready for use took 31 percent longer with this suite installed than with no suite. Given that most people rarely reboot more than once per day, this probably won't be noticeable.

A script that moves and copies many large files took 7 percent longer with Trend Micro watching. That's actually a bit better than the current average of 9 percent. And another script that repeatedly zips and unzips those files took 13 percent longer, just a little above the current average of 10 percent.

There are definitely suites with lower overall impact. Webroot's average impact across my three tests was just 3 percent. F-Secure and Bitdefender averaged 4 percent. Even so, I doubt you'll be able to perceive any system slowdown after installing Trend Micro.

Sub-Ratings:
Note: These sub-ratings contribute to a product's overall star rating, as do other factors, including ease of use in real-world testing, bonus features, and overall integration of features.
Firewall: n/a
Antivirus:

Performance:

Antispam:

Privacy:

Parental Control:


Full Article
I don't think so ..... TrendMicro?
this is my opinion http://malwaretips.com/threads/2015-02-01-kelihos-simda-161-update21.41243/page-6#post-342932
Sorry