- CONSUMER REPORTS AVIRA VS AVAST FULL
- CONSUMER REPORTS AVIRA VS AVAST PC
- CONSUMER REPORTS AVIRA VS AVAST WINDOWS
CONSUMER REPORTS AVIRA VS AVAST PC
The list includes these 12 products: AhnLab, Avira, Bitdefender, BullGuard, F-Secure, K7 Computing, McAfee, Microsoft, NortonLifeLock, PC Matic, and VIPRE Security.Ī minor load on the PC was caused by G Data, Kaspersky, Microworld and Trend Micro.
CONSUMER REPORTS AVIRA VS AVAST FULL
The result shows that many programs are able to use the system resources of the PC very sparingly, thus also earning the full 6 points. In the test, all these operations are repeated, but this time a protection product is installed on each system.
This includes opening websites, installing, and launching programs, as well as performing downloads and copying data. In doing so, many operations are carried out on a high-end PC and a standard PC, clocking the time required for each. The lab meticulously measured the extent to which this is the case for some security suites. While several of the production packages are consistently effective in detecting the malware samples, some of them use a good amount of PC resources in the process. For K7 Computing, Malwarebytes, Microworld, and PC Matic, the detection rate dropped further from 98 all the way to 93.6 percent. Here, the results were only 98.4 percent. From on down, the detection rate dropped considerably, however. AhnLab, Avira and VIPRE Security achieved high levels of 99.7 and 99.6 percent respectively. BullGuard, for example, detected 99.9 percent. Whereas the remainder of the test field also managed the reference set error-free, there were issues in the real-world test. More than half the participants, 11 to be exact, passed both test phases of protection evaluation absolutely error-free: Avast, AVG, Bitdefender, ESET, F-Secure, G Data, Kaspersky, McAfee, Microsoft, NortonLifeLock and Trend Micro detected all attackers 100 percent. All the packages were required to successfully complete a round of testing each month and to detect, quarantine and delete nearly 40,000 malware samples. In the second test, involving the so-called reference set, the lab examines whether the products can also detect already registered malware. These brand-new malware samples are particularly dangerous and also cannot be easily detected by some programs. Here is how the lab goes about it: In the real-world test, the experts use freshly-caught zero-day malware from emails and downloads. The key element of the endurance test is the evaluation of a product's protection capability. At the end of the ranking is PC Matic, scoring a mere 14.3 points. The next echelon of packages from Microworld and Malwarebytes reached only 15.9 and 15.8 points. By comparison: In a classic monthly test, products achieving a score of 17.5 to 18 points even receive special recognition.Ĭoming in next were Bitdefender and with 17.3 points, followed by K7 Computing with 17 points. AhnLab, ESET, Avast and AVG followed with 17.7 and 17.5 points respectively. Also scoring an excellent 17.8 points were the products from Avira, BullGuard, G Data, Kaspersky, Trend Micro and VIPRE Security. They are from F-Secure, McAfee, Microsoft and NortonLifeLock. A total of 4 packages achieved this outstanding feat. In the 6-month endurance test, each package had the opportunity to score up to 18 points: 6 points each for the three areas of protection, performance, and usability.
CONSUMER REPORTS AVIRA VS AVAST WINDOWS
The result shows that in the endurance test there are many protection packages that can stand up against an incredible number of malware samples, yet they do not bog down the Windows system or trigger false alarms.
14 protection packages scored 17.5 to 18 points In the endurance test from July to December 2020, nearly 40,000 proliferating and especially dangerous malware samples were applied – per product. At the end of 2020, that number reached 1.139 billion samples – an increase of nearly 14 percent. Malware statistics at the end of 2019 showed a total of 1.001 billion registered malware samples. Especially in times of Corona, attackers see many opportunities to prey on private data or to extort users with ransomware. Spam with infected attachments or dangerous downloads are but a few of the risks facing the PCs of private users.
0 kommentar(er)
