Avast WEBforum

Other => General Topics => Topic started by: o2xygen on September 20, 2009, 02:37:25 AM

Title: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: o2xygen on September 20, 2009, 02:37:25 AM: AV-C released today the new test. Surpriced that nobody posted the test! but the forum is a little nohelic these days especially the beta corner!
the PDF can be found on http://www.av-comparatives.org/
cannot link to the PDF due to AV-C restrictions, it can be found under Comparative Reviews - Main Tests.

Avast 4.8 scored very high as always with 5 false positives, gaining the Advanced+ award. It was also the fastest in Scanning speed without transient technologies by other contenters, just pure speed.
Surpriced by McAffee that scored high this time but with Artemis (in the cloud) enabled. Also Symantec was expected to be high along with Avira. FSecure seems to be finding its way again. GData has reduced the number of False positives and it was the top of the contenders in terms of Detection but no wonder since it uses the avast engine 8) along with BD engine which scored high as well.

Looking forward to seeing avast 5 scoring a 99.9% in the next test!
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: mathboyx215 on September 20, 2009, 02:45:23 AM: Was surprised to see that avira was not no.1 this time.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: jisuna23 on September 20, 2009, 07:27:29 AM: lolz!! im sure avast 5 will definitely be more greater and superior than avast 4.8.. avast team should not let us down ;D
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Tarq57 on September 20, 2009, 12:11:31 PM: Well done Alwil.
Probably cause for a few after work drinks, perhaps?
I know that the "rankings" move around a bit from quarter to quarter. What impresses me is that Avast always ranks quite well, and sometimes (as in this case) very well indeed.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Cahya Legawa on September 20, 2009, 12:27:40 PM: Nice to hear it :D

I wish the next release will give us that power ;)
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Bluesman on September 20, 2009, 12:44:01 PM: Yes, great news for us avast nerds! :)

Keep up the good work Alwil guys!
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: .: L' arc :. on September 20, 2009, 01:11:22 PM: avast 4.8 beat most of AVs with heuristics in detections. Now, what else if avast 5 gets into some comparatives. BOOM. Major reshuffle for Avira & GData. :grin:
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Mr.Agent on September 20, 2009, 03:10:26 PM: lol we will alway see Avast! and G-Data as the best Anti Virus and Suite when version 5 is out for sure. ;D
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: micky77 on September 20, 2009, 03:32:42 PM: Quote from: .: L' arc :. on September 20, 2009, 01:11:22 PM
Major reshuffle for Avira & GData. :grin:

Avira found 21,000 more detections, but had 16 more FP's.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: .: L' arc :. on September 20, 2009, 03:47:14 PM: Quote from: micky77 on September 20, 2009, 03:32:42 PM
Quote from: .: L' arc :. on September 20, 2009, 01:11:22 PM
Major reshuffle for Avira & GData. :grin:

Avira found 21,000 more detections, but had 16 more FP's.
eh? so what's up for the quoted phrase?
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: spg SCOTT on September 20, 2009, 11:27:54 PM: There's a blog post :)

avast! blog >> Did Avast win the latest AV-Comparatives? (http://blog.avast.com/2009/09/20/did-avast-win-the-latest-avcomparatives/)
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: DavidR on September 21, 2009, 12:21:29 AM: Yes, a very good set of results this time round.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Mr.Agent on September 21, 2009, 12:33:24 AM: Also they did make a fault because its 1351 no 1348 lol.

Also Tarq his self did not update his signature for say 1351 instead of 1335 lol.

Wake up guys and girls.

Dont sleep. ;D

Mr.Agent
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: igor on September 21, 2009, 12:34:54 AM: The number is correct - that's the build that was tested.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Mr.Agent on September 21, 2009, 12:36:14 AM: I dont see any 1348 in your VPS Version History.... ???
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: spg SCOTT on September 21, 2009, 12:42:39 AM: Quote from: Mr.Agent on September 21, 2009, 12:36:14 AM
I dont see any 1348 in your VPS Version History.... ???

Wasn't it a beta for the latest version?

http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=47445.0
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Mr.Agent on September 21, 2009, 12:45:36 AM: Maybe that explain all. Thank Scott.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: mathboyx215 on September 21, 2009, 12:48:35 AM: Quote from: spg SCOTT on September 21, 2009, 12:42:39 AM
Quote from: Mr.Agent on September 21, 2009, 12:36:14 AM
I dont see any 1348 in your VPS Version History.... ???

Wasn't it a beta for the latest version?

http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=47445.0
Why would av comparative test a beta version?
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: DavidR on September 21, 2009, 12:54:05 AM: We aren't talking about AV-Comparatives but Tarq's signature saying he is using that version and we think that it is incorrect.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Mr.Agent on September 21, 2009, 12:56:37 AM: I was talking about AV-Comparative. For 1348.

Tarq did not update his signature or program as he say 1335 in his signature...

Mr.Agent
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: DavidR on September 21, 2009, 01:00:21 AM: OK, it is possible that they gave av-comparatives the latest build if it had any change to detections/scanning optimisation, etc. which was ready for the next program update. Not that it matters that much given the results.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Lisandro on September 21, 2009, 03:10:30 AM: Congratulations!

This is my post on the blog:

Quote
I’m quite happy the point “speed” get huge improvements.
Hope the avast 5 do not lose the low false positives rates with the behavior shield.
The detection is quite good.

One suggestion (from the forums): get a better submission process.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Yachiru on September 21, 2009, 03:27:09 AM: avast is one of the best anti virus.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: JuninhoSlo on September 23, 2009, 03:34:27 PM: Well done Avast ;)

Have a nice day. :)
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Tarq57 on September 24, 2009, 03:15:51 AM: Quote from: Mr.Agent on September 21, 2009, 12:56:37 AM
I was talking about AV-Comparative. For 1348.

Tarq did not update his signature or program as he say 1335 in his signature...

Mr.Agent
It was either a typo, or I haven't updated my profile for a while. I'm using 4.8.1351, and have been since it was released.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: Northeast on September 24, 2009, 02:09:51 PM: I just hope avast 5 with it's new heuristic technology can outperform all the other anti-viruses and be as good as gdata as they both use the same engine and become the best anti-virus program.

I'll give Avira credit as I know they did have 21 false positives but I just read the whole article and there heuristic was set to high and they would normally with other anti-virus programs like TF would require to set it to medium as to minimizes it's false positives.

But I support any free anti-virus software like avast, avira, avg as I know a lot of other country and people that don't have enough money to buy anti-virus software as well as other computer software.
Title: Re: AV-Comparatives New Test (August 2009)
Post by: .: L' arc :. on September 24, 2009, 03:54:54 PM: Quote
I support any free anti-virus software like avast, avira, avg

Just noticed that best free antiviruses seem to begin with an "a". Avast, Avira, AVG.

UPD: A. Sorry. It was not just "a" it was "av"