faizfahmi77 (12-16-2016),joeramone (01-09-2014)
Comparison of security suites
This thread is based on AV Comparatives' work and uses the newest overall results available for ranking the security suites. Although this may present the best current AVs using AV Comparatives' methodology, general trends and past evaluations can be viewed on their site for a better overview of the AV market. The security suites are for the most part Internet Suites, meaning they have a bundled AV and internet security package (firewalls, anti-phishers, email scanners etc.). General past trends and specific tests show the best AVs being F-Secure, Symantec, Kaspersky, and G Data, but the overall latest performance test results can be seen below with links to the specific products. The products are sorted and grouped based on detection rates that do not depend on user decisions.
Given the detection rates and product prices, the best choices for personal protection are most likely Kaspersky, Avira or G Data.
99% or better detection rate
- Symantec
- Detection rate: 100% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($70 for 1 year) | Trial
- F-Secure
- Detection rate: 99.8% (0.3% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($60 for 1 year) | Trial
- Kaspersky
- Detection rate: 99.6% (0.3% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($40 for 1 year) | Trial
- Bitdefender
- Detection rate: 99.3% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($50 for 1 year) | Trial
- G Data
- Detection rate: 99.2% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($35 for 1 year) | Trial
95-99% detection rate
- Avira
- Detection rate: 98.7% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($20 for 1 year) | Trial | Free AV
- Trendmicro
- Detection rate: 98.7% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($50 for 1 year) | Trial
- K7
- Detection rate: 97.3% (1% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($50 for 1 year) | Trial
- Sophos
- Detection rate: 97.0% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy (price depends on business size) | Trial
- AVG
- Detection rate: 96.6% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($55 for 1 year) | Trial | Free AV
- Panda
- Detection rate: 96.6% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($61 for 1 year) | Trial
- Eset
- Detection rate: 96.6% (0.3% user dependent)
- Official site | $60 for 1 year | Trial
- Avast
- Detection rate: 95.9% (2.3% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($40 for 1 year) | Trial | Free AV
- McAfee
- Detection rate: 95.5% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($40 for 1 year) | Trial
- Webroot
- Detection rate: 93.3% (0% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($36 for 1 year) | Trial
- PC Tools
- Detection rate: 99.0% (9.4% user dependent)
- Official site | Buy ($50 for 1 year)
Last edited by Alen; 02-16-2012 at 02:58 AM.
I'm Alen on Steam. RIP Skype Friday nights.
I'm Navi's lover 💖
Dave84311: God I've always wanted to eat crayons, with their vibrant colors. Only if they had taste.
Mr. Lonely: @Alen I like making you wet, it makes me hard.
faizfahmi77 (12-16-2016),joeramone (01-09-2014)
This is really good info. I'm thinking about getting Kaspersky.
I'm Alen on Steam. RIP Skype Friday nights.
I'm Navi's lover 💖
Dave84311: God I've always wanted to eat crayons, with their vibrant colors. Only if they had taste.
Mr. Lonely: @Alen I like making you wet, it makes me hard.
@Alen I've had a better experience with ESET Nod32 than any of the "99% detection rate" software you listed. I've gained numerous virus's whilst using Kaspersky, and Bit Defender was full of false positives.
Other than that fantastic list
Just look on their site for more specific test results or go check other independent studies, Kaspersky is considered one of the best AVs, Avira's considered great too. In the end it might just come down to personal preference or specific features
The top AVs usually had around the same amount of false positives per test (I think it was a sample of a couple hundred threats and they had 0-15 false positives or something). Although it's a good AV (dunno why it wasn't ranked) just like Kaspersky or Bitdefender, nothing is perfect and no AV can guarantee 100% security. Guess you just had an unlucky run with them, dunno. I would personally really recommend you give Avira a shot though, even though it isn't on top of this list it regularly beats the other "top" AVs in tests.
I'm Alen on Steam. RIP Skype Friday nights.
I'm Navi's lover 💖
Dave84311: God I've always wanted to eat crayons, with their vibrant colors. Only if they had taste.
Mr. Lonely: @Alen I like making you wet, it makes me hard.
100% Detection Rate? I know for a fact that there are things which can get around Kaspersky, so what is this even based on?
I'm Alen on Steam. RIP Skype Friday nights.
I'm Navi's lover 💖
Dave84311: God I've always wanted to eat crayons, with their vibrant colors. Only if they had taste.
Mr. Lonely: @Alen I like making you wet, it makes me hard.
The way you displayed the information with no clear explanation of the methodology used to determine these results within the thread is very misleading. What I saw, and what most people and will see upon entering the thread is: Kaspersky: 100% Detection Rate. You should probably add "of the files tested". That's what most of these kinds of articles do.
Last edited by Blitz; 12-12-2011 at 04:37 PM.
I'm Alen on Steam. RIP Skype Friday nights.
I'm Navi's lover 💖
Dave84311: God I've always wanted to eat crayons, with their vibrant colors. Only if they had taste.
Mr. Lonely: @Alen I like making you wet, it makes me hard.
The average user encounters more threats than someone with experience. The average user isn't going to check your source and read several pages in to understand the methodology used, and the average user isn't going to distinguish this information from a factual percentage of viruses detected, and a complex testing system used to give results that don't actually represent the real detection rates of this AV just by you saying "best current AVs using AV Comparatives' methodology". At least, I don't think so. Am I asking you to fix it? No, there is a bar set on how much effort I feel should be put in to something before it becomes a lost cause to me. But, just sayin' -- if you care about this thread you might want to add a few more details.
Last edited by Blitz; 12-12-2011 at 05:06 PM.
As Blitz pointed out, these aren't long term measurements nor "perfect" statistics - they're just test performed on a sample that was considered representative of what a normal user could come across. Lots of factors aren't tested here, from actual performance to the latest updates.
I'm Alen on Steam. RIP Skype Friday nights.
I'm Navi's lover 💖
Dave84311: God I've always wanted to eat crayons, with their vibrant colors. Only if they had taste.
Mr. Lonely: @Alen I like making you wet, it makes me hard.
segerydrth (01-10-2013)