Thousands of new malware samples appear on the Internet every day. Virus-writers invent more and more new methods to prevent detecting and removing malware code from the system such as using rootkit-technology masking. No antivirus can guarantee 100% protection of your computer under such conditions that is why an ordinary user will always run into a risk of infection even if he has an antivirus protection installed.
In many cases, a malware let into your computer can stay unnoticed for quite a log time even if an antivirus is installed. In this case, a user will have a false feeling of protection as his antivirus will not alarm any danger while the malefactors will be collecting confidential information or use his computer capacities with the help of their active malware application. If also often happens that an antivirus detects a malware but cannot delete it that makes the user apply for technical support or remove infection by himself using some extra tools.
Antivirus vendors can protect their customers developing malware detection and removing technologies. But practice proves that only some of them pay due attention to this protection aspect.
The objective of this test is to check personal antiviruses for their capacity to detect and remove malware successfully (without interfering with operation system operability) after it penetrated into your computer, started acting and hid its activity.
Methodology used for testing antiviruses for the treatment of active infections »
Analysis of test results and awards »
Contents:
- Introduction
- Comparison of healing possibilities
- Final test results and awards
- Analysis of changes as compared to the previous tests
Key results of the testing
|
|
Dr.Web Anti-Virus 5.00 (81%) |
|
|
Avast! Professional Edition 4.8 (63%) |
|
|
Norton AntiVirus 2010 (56%) |
|
Failed |
Panda Antivirus 2010 (38%) |
Key results of the testing of antivirus products for the treatment of active infections in HTML»
Complete results for each antivirus product are available only in PDF or Microsoft Excel format:
Antivirus performance is the most important characteristic for most users as well as the quality of protection itself. This characteristic is the one that both home users and corporate customers pay their attention to when buying an antivirus. Nobody needs powerful but too resource-intensive protection with which you just cannot use your computer for doing what you would like to.
If the protection quality is very hard to evaluate all by yourself it is quite easy to notice immediately when the operating system and other programs slowdown or file copying and web-pages downloading "hang up". A reliable and practically unnoticeable antivirus is the biggest dream of every usual user.
The objective of this test is to show how personal antivirus software influences the typical operations performed by the user, slows down its work and utilizes the system resources.
While performing the tests, we measured and compared parameters having a direct influence on the user's perception of antivirus performance, namely:
The test results give a clear idea of the performance of antivirus represented in the market. Having compared this information with Anti-Malware.ru test results, every user can make an informed choice in favor of this or that antivirus solution.
Methodology used for antivirus performance testing »
Analysis of the test results and awards »
Contents:
- Introduction
- Antivirus effect on the operation system boot time
- Antivirus resource-intensiveness comparison
- On-access antivirus scanner performance comparison
- On-demand antivirus scanner performance comparison
- Antivirus performance comparison for office applications
Key results of the testing
|
Award |
The fastest antivirus on-access scanners | The fastest antivirus on-demand scanners | The fastest office application antivirus scanners |
| Platinum Award | ![]() Avast |
![]() Avira |
![]() - |
| Gold Award | ![]() Avira Norton BitDefender Sophos AVG Kaspersky Panda |
![]() Kaspersky Norton BitDefender F-Secure Outpost |
![]() BitDefender Avira McAfee Microsoft Eset Avast AVG |
| Silver Award | ![]() Trend Micro F-Secure Outpost |
![]() Trend Micro Avast Sophos AVG Panda |
![]() Dr.Web VirusBlokAda Sophos |
| Bronze Award | ![]() Eset |
![]() McAfee VirusBlokAda Eset |
![]() Outpost Panda |
| No award |
McAfee Microsoft Dr.Web VirusBlokAda |
Microsoft Dr.Web |
Kaspersky Norton F-Secure Trend Micro |
Key results from the antivirus antivirus preformance test in HTML»
Complete results for each antivirus product are available only in Microsoft Excel format:
Many antivirus malware protection tests performed round the world were criticized by professionals as they considered them synthetic and far from reality. The first and the main claim was that only some antivirus protection components (such as classical signature detect or heuristics) are tested during the file collection test launch. At the same time, no contribution of other technologies (such as behavioral analysis, HIPS or reputation services, firewall/IDS, HTTP on-the-fly traffic, etc.) is taken into consideration.
The second sound reason is that a real user does not store and launch any old malware on its hard drive. As a rule, only Zero-day samples penetrate there and no antivirus can protect against them.
The work efficiency can also to some extent depend on the penetration method as some antivirus software can eliminate the infection threat at the stage of malware script launch at the web-page, others do that during loaders activation downloaded with exploit, and the third ones do it even later, with the installed malware start.
In this test we analyzed the complex antivirus protection effectiveness to Zero-day malware spread via websites.
We collected links to infected websites from different sources. As a rule, everyone can come across such links in search engines, E-mail, ICQ, Skype and other instant messengers or social networks.
Key results of the testing
| Award | Products |
| DefenseWall 2.56 | |
|
|
Kaspersky Internet Security 2010 Comodo Internet Security 3.9 Trend Micro Internet Security 2009 |
![]() Silver Zero-day Protection Award |
Sophos Anti-Virus 7.6 Safe'n'Sec Personal 3.5 Avira Premium Security Suite 9.0 Norton Internet Security 2009 Avast Antivirus Professional 4.8 |
|
|
Eset Smart Security 4.0 AVG Internet Security 8.5 Microsoft Security Essential 1.0 G-DATA Internet Security 2010 |
|
Failed
|
F-Secure Internet Security 2009 McAfee Internet Security Suite 13 Outpost Security Suite 2009 Panda Internet Security 2010 BitDefender Internet Security 2009 Dr.Web Security Space 5.0 |
Key results from the antivirus antivirus preformance test in HTML»
Recent comments
37 weeks 6 days ago
47 weeks 6 days ago
51 weeks 3 days ago
51 weeks 3 days ago
51 weeks 3 days ago
1 year 14 weeks ago
1 year 25 weeks ago
1 year 27 weeks ago
1 year 28 weeks ago
1 year 35 weeks ago