AV-Test releases first Windows 8 anti-virus comparisons

The German-based security firm AV-Test has been offering their independent testing results of various anti-virus solutions PC solutions for some time. This week, for the first time, AV-Test released a study of consumer and business-based anti-virus solutions made specifically to be run on Windows 8.

The consumer tests covered a whopping 26 software solutions, which were examined between January and February 2013. Each product is rated based on their performance, reliability and protection. Each category can get a score from zero to six, six being highest, with a total highest score of 18. AV-Test considers a total score of 10 enough to be certified by the firm.

In this case, Microsoft's own Windows Defender 4.0 is considered to be the baseline for the test. It managed to get certified by AV-Test with a score of 11.5. Bitdefender was rated highest among Windows 8 anti-virus solutions with a score of 17, followed by BullGuard with 16.5 and Kaspersky Lab with 16. Two anti-virus products, AhnLab and Comodo, got scores of 10 each, both below the baseline but still just enough to get certification from AV-Test.

As far as business solutions, eight software products were studied by AV-Test for Windows 8. Microsoft's System Center Endpoint Protection, which got a 12.5 score, was the baseline, but the top corporate anti-virus software products for Windows 8 was a tie between Fortinet and Symantec with scores of 16.5 each.

Source: AV-Test | Image via AV-Test

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft's Frank Shaw joins the Facebook Home bashing crowd

Next Story

Microsoft cuts down another DirectX shutdown rumor

35 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I had a virus on my system yesterday that Windows Defender did not remove, or even recognize. Scans where clean. Anytime I did something with "AV" or Virusscanner on a website, or on my system, the program would 'mysteriously' shut down all of a sudden
Nice way of hiding it haha.

its unfortunally still on my system but I managed to make it inactive.
Couldn't find any information on this but its a pretty horrible virus. That I think I've gotten from drive-by. (As I use Fx/Iron/IE mixed through eachother, I cant say which one)

Either way, watch out for processes like jushed.exe and rundil32.exe which are hidden in your %APPDATA%/Microsoft/ folder

I took away all rights to the file and basically used Windows' build in rights systems to lock it out of doing anything.
I'd still rather have it gone tho but I have to reboot into a Linux live cd before doing so and atm I CBA.

These tests are complete BS. They even have the Windows 8 defender as having only average performance, when anyone who has used it knows that it's far better than the other antivirus software for not bogging your system down. I would not be surprised if they get money for their ratings. They would never admit something like that either.

aionaddict said,
you must have not heard anything about Norton in many years.

That's the first thing to go on every computer I've ever fixed. Everyone complains to me that they installed Norton and it slowed their computers down like crazy. That, and McAfee.

This is Bull**t. All these antivirus gonna suck your computer's speed, it will happen slowly, at first reboot you won't see much difference but with every reboot your computer is going to get slower, windows defender is exception though and one of the best antivirus I ever used.

Performance column in the table is bit confusing, how can any antivirus can beat windows defender in performance.

Chicane-UK said,
Happy ESET user here. No performance problems.

ESET is one of very few genuine antivirus companies out there but I am not into antiviruses. I am not bit of a gamer but it's just annoying when sometimes I play games and use game trainers these antiviruses delete trainers.

Chicane-UK said,
Happy ESET user here. No performance problems.

No performance issues here with Avast either.

I call shenanigans on all these tests. I have seen practically all these AVs on various student systems that I serviced and only when we installed MSE or used Windows Defender that students did not get infected.

I actually used to SWEAR by MSE up until about 2 years ago when a PC I was using (nice lightweight install, no junk, MSE as my AV) just got annhilated by some horrid malware.. was, ironically doing a bit of Googling to find information on a virus a friend said they'd just got and clicked through to a non-descript page and my PC went ape. In like 15 years of working in IT, I'd hardly ever seen anything like it... spent a few minutes working out what happened, and then immediately trashed my install and rebuilt as I didn't know how much it had infected my machine.

At that point I switched to ESET and have had no problems since.

It's worth noting that you can't measure these things on your own, expecting the results to tell you one way or another with such a small sample of tests. Whether you get viruses or not, you're still looking at a small amount of data with rather specific viruses, instead of any real test that could determine the ability for an antivirus to actually catch all the signatures properly, let alone be capable of fixing those issues.

Anecdotal evidence is simply just that, and should be taken with a grain of salt.

Chicane-UK said,
I actually used to SWEAR by MSE up until about 2 years ago when a PC I was using (nice lightweight install, no junk, MSE as my AV) just got annhilated by some horrid malware.. was, ironically doing a bit of Googling to find information on a virus a friend said they'd just got and clicked through to a non-descript page and my PC went ape. In like 15 years of working in IT, I'd hardly ever seen anything like it... spent a few minutes working out what happened, and then immediately trashed my install and rebuilt as I didn't know how much it had infected my machine.

At that point I switched to ESET and have had no problems since.

To be honest, when I'm looking for information on a virus, I like to use a virtual machine with a snapshot saved with each update because I've heard of a few incidents where that happened. I still use Windows Defender 4 on my machine and keep SmartScreen turned on in both Windows and Internet Explorer. SmartScreen in IE already does a great job of keeping the crap out. SmartScreen in Windows catches anything that slips through (which hasn't happened so far), and Windows Defender catches the rest (which hasn't happened either). Still works for me, and I still recommend MSE wholeheartedly to everyone who asks.

HawkMan said,
/me looks at the usability score on AVG

Yeah, this test is BS.

You didn't read the fine print:

"* This test was conduced using a ten-foot pole"

I've used it for years now and still nothing infected. With any modern OS you could probably not use an AV, a bit of common sense and be just fine.

AVs aren't supposed to be a replacement for common sense.

-Razorfold said,
With any modern OS you could probably not use an AV

Ironically, people have been saying exactly this since the 90s. I'm not sure what "modern OS" means anymore.

-Razorfold said,
I've used it for years now and still nothing infected. With any modern OS you could probably not use an AV, a bit of common sense and be just fine.

AVs aren't supposed to be a replacement for common sense.

This common sense you speak of isn't very common. I love how many friends think because they have a virus scanner they are immune to viruses.

rippleman said,
anyone that says virus prevention is easy as common sense is... well... you know...

Educated on safe computer habits and the inner workings of their OS?

Joshie said,

Ironically, people have been saying exactly this since the 90s. I'm not sure what "modern OS" means anymore.

An OS explicitly designed for use by a non-Administrative user that provides sandboxing, memory, file system, and process security. Basically, on the Microsoft side, anything Vista/2008 and higher would be "modern" (although XP or 2003 could be made to be fairly secure, they tend to be pretty broken to use at that point).

srbeen said,

I love how many friends think because they have a virus scanner they are immune to viruses.

Yep, they think AV software is a cyber-condom that lets them poke around every dark corner of the web without a care in the world.

-Razorfold said,
I've used it for years now and still nothing infected. With any modern OS you could probably not use an AV, a bit of common sense and be just fine.

AVs aren't supposed to be a replacement for common sense.

All the common sense in the world isn't going to protect you from a zero day vulnerability.

The problem with BitDefender is that it's quite intrusive (lots of prompts) and significantly impacts performance. The scans also take a lot longer than the competition. The amount of protection that it offers is great but it's just not worth the performance trade-off.

theyarecomingforyou said,
The problem with BitDefender is that it's quite intrusive (lots of prompts) and significantly impacts performance. The scans also take a lot longer than the competition. The amount of protection that it offers is great but it's just not worth the performance trade-off.

Agreed. That false promotional they offered, I got to try it hands on for a little bit (until they revoked the offer). Glad I tested it out because I know for sure what it is that I don't like now...

theyarecomingforyou said,
The problem with BitDefender is that it's quite intrusive (lots of prompts) and significantly impacts performance. The scans also take a lot longer than the competition. The amount of protection that it offers is great but it's just not worth the performance trade-off.

What prompts?

I have it set on Auto-Pilot and I haven't seen _ANY_ prompts from it. Like, nada, zip, zero.

It adds a lil bubble notification on it's interface whenever it has taken some action, and I can view it and recover/delete the file it has quarantined. But no prompts, and I love that.