Avast WEBforum
Consumer Products => Avast Free Antivirus / Premium Security (legacy Pro Antivirus, Internet Security, Premier) => Topic started by: A. User on February 11, 2013, 04:59:42 PM
-
Hi everyone,
can you tell me why Bitdefender has 8 780 000 virus definitions and Avast! has only 3 959 000?
:) :) :)
-
Because avast! signatures are more generic, so it's enough to have less of them.
-
Reactive vs proactive ;)
-
Let's be fair. We cannot call BitDefender a non-proactive antimalware.
-
so which is the best between avast vs bit defender ?
-
The "best" is something very dear relative. The ideal security solution will depend on the user profile (basic or advanced), usage profile of the computer hardware configuration of the machine and user ID with the security software adopted. There is no single answer to your question, because as you can see it is not so simple.
Friend, 100% detection would mean that we would have a perfect system, and this world we live in unfortunately we are far from perfect.
I think we should always seek a security solution that ensures the excellent level of protection, but also not forgetting its usability and low consumption of computer resources.
Avira Free Antivirus has an excellent base of detection signatures, and this is a consensus in the market. Moreover Avira lacks a tool for detecting very recent those threats for which signatures are not yet available that can detect them, known as time zero.
Avast Free Antivirus does not have signatures with the same quality of Avira, but otherwise has a detector behavior and a sandbox that can stop the attack of zero hour threats.
So you can not say that this is better than that, because each has its pros and cons.
Viewing the test result of Matousec realizes that Comodo, Emsisoft Karspersky and (despite not aprecer test) are the only really suites complete when evaluating each of its protection tools. BitDefender, G-Data, Avast, Norton, Vipre, Eset, Avira, Panda, AVG and Bullguard suites are good, but always fall short in some of its protection tools. Many have a great data base, but fall short on behavioral module, those which have good detection signatures and good modulus behavior leave much to be desired as regards the firewall.
Besides each ferremantas of Comodo, Emsisoft Karspersky and be efficient, draws attention to the harmony of tools when working together, making these the best existing suites.
I'm not saying that the other suites are bad, but by historical tests and realizes that they are not complete as the three mentioned.
At first module HIPS offers greater protection than a detector system behavior, but this of course will vary due to the quality of the product itself.
This is the case, for example, BitDefender Internet Security 2013 that has an excellent detection performance that is equivalent in quality to the CIS module HIPS or KIS.
In terms of security suite and beyond the CIS and BitDefender, I would highlight the GData Internet Security 2013 and Emsisoft Security Pack as other great options
-
so which is the best between avast vs bit defender ?
These are both top ranking antivirus programs. Both have great detection and performance. This may not be the case with different configurations. Not every computer has the exact same configuration and OS health. It is best to test each of these on your computer to see how it performs.
Avast continues to introduce new technology and with this, I believe they will be a consistent #1 in testing.
Read here. -> https://blog.avast.com/2012/12/03/new-toy-research-lab/
One developer has great tech support and malware removal help, whereas the other has decided that their support should only show up on occasion.
One day you may have an emergency regarding your computer, antivirus program and malware removal and need help now and not when it is convenient for support to show up. This is something that people don't often consider until they have serious problems. This is something that I now strongly consider. Avast has a very active forum. A look into each forum is quite revealing.
-
Ok, but look here: http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/novdec-2012/ (http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/novdec-2012/) and rate them by protection ,here: http://www.av-test.org/en/test-procedures/award/2012/ (http://www.av-test.org/en/test-procedures/award/2012/) and here: http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/none/306670-bitdefender-named-product-of-the-year-by-av-comparatives (http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/none/306670-bitdefender-named-product-of-the-year-by-av-comparatives)
-
Most people on this forum are aware of these tests. It doesn't do much good if it doesn't run correctly on your computer and you don't receive the proper technical support when you need it.
Your only response is links to independent testing? Did you even read the previous posts?
-
They can be FPs ...
That does not mean anything at all always check them with VT to see if they are really malicious.
Also, if you want to know which product is good grabb a VM to test them.
-
In fact, when i switch from Avast! to Bitdefender for a 30-day trial, Bitdefender found a malware and removed it. When i switch back from Bitdefender to Avast, Avast also found a malware and removed it.
Interesting scenario. It sounds like you would have been an ideal candidate for using G-Data.
Last time I looked, it was using two different licensed scanning engines: Avast's and Bitdefender's
-
@Spywar: I will do it if i can. After they are quarantined i can't do anything with them. To check them they need to be out of the quarantine which is dangerous if they aren't FPs.
@ Waking : i'll see what i can do.
-
In fact, when i switch from Avast! to Bitdefender for a 30-day trial, Bitdefender found a malware and removed it. When i switch back from Bitdefender to Avast, Avast also found a malware and removed it. That mean neither Avast! nor Bitdefender are perfect.
What each program finds is dependent upon what type of scan you run. Scan settings differ from program to program. One may check archives and the other may not. Also, the type of detection makes a difference.
In fact, when i switch from Avast! to Bitdefender for a 30-day trial, Bitdefender found a malware and removed it. When i switch back from Bitdefender to Avast, Avast also found a malware and removed it.
Interesting scenario. It sounds like you would have been an ideal candidate for using G-Data.
Last time I looked, it was using two different licensed scanning engines: Avast's and Bitdefender's
Like I said, you should test it first. I trialled G-Data and it brought my system to a crawl. Nothing worse than an av that causes your computer to become sluggish. For me, its performance was unacceptable. But, this was on my computer and it may run perfectly fine on a different computer.
-
avast all the way!
-
Right, i think i will stay with Avast! - it's better.
-
Hello all,
I have recently tried Bitdefender free and AVG free on a few of my machines and it didn't take me too long to switch back to Avast. Here's why I went back to Avast:
Bitdefender free had no options and I couldn't tell what it was doing and I wasn't sure if I was being adequately protected. It also lacked a boot-time scan so I had to create a simulated boot scan by using their rescue disc (I created). Boy, what a hassle! AND, I just didn't like the AVG user interface; period! Anyway, they both lacked a key feature (for me) that Avast free offers (ie, mail scanner) and they both were more hoggish on resources (noticeable lag) than Avast so I switched back pronto! In closing, I must say that I have used Avast for several years and I have never been infected. Thanks Avast!