Definitive Best Antivirus

[Si Veteran]

Please use this thread as a reference for this topic, as time goes on and availabilty changes, the poll will be updated.

[Guest Jeremy of Many]

I've just read through this entire topic. This just reassured me what I already know:

The two very best anti-virus programs are NOD32 and Kaspersky. Although the detection rate of the product is important, it should not be the sole factor to base your decision on. You have the following factors:

- GUI

- Filesize

- Memory usage

- Detection rate

- Threat response time

- Frequency of updates

- Scanning efficiency (Archives and executables, thoroughness, types of viruses, scan time (obviously affected by what it can scan), etc)

- Number of Services (some people are picky about this, including myself)

- Number of processes ((some people are picky about this, including myself)

- Any unique features that set it apart from others? For example, NOD32's ThreatSense and Kaspersky's iSwift/iChecker.

Another thing to point out: Depending on your "computer sense", the importance of some of the above factors will vary. I personally am not concerned with scan time since I feel that as long as the task gets completed, I will wait patiently. I'll likely get up and do something else during the scan.

I'm using a D-Link DI-604 router, the Opera web browser, I don't open any unrecognised e-mail. If I do recognise it and there is an attachment, I will scan it with Kaspersky before I open it. I only use torrents, no other "p2p" program. I also have an nLited installation where I removed many components and EXEs commonly used in exploitation attempts.

I will provide screenshots of the GUI, Services, processes, memory usage, pre-install / post-install filesizes, and scan times for you and everyone else later.

I'd like to thank everyone with a post count over 1000 for setting many others straight in regards to the "<insert program name here> sucks! <insert program name here> rules!" comments.

I'd also like to thank Ghost96 for his very informative posts.

See this post: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=87213

See my blog entry: http://jeremy.zxian.org/?page_id=23

See this website: http://www.av-comparatives.org

[severach]

Until a single program has complete definition coverage, the best performance, and the least problems there will be a need for more than one antivirus.

My personal machines have a low risk of infection and a high likelihood that I'll spot miscreant behavior. I don't need the best detection but I do need performance and reliability so I use AVG.

I initially cleaned heavily infected customer computers with whatever AV was handy then cleaned by hand what was missed. With that positive feedback it didn't take long to work my way to the programs that do the best work which are Kaspersky and McAfee command line. After I had found that these scanners couldn't be topped I ran across http://www.av-comparatives.org/ which unlike the other AV review sites peddling B.S., these tests had a strong correlation to my findings. I never turn on Kaspersky on demand scanning because it makes the computer unusable. Kasperksy has had a long Long LONG history of bugs and problems with their windows on demand scanners so I will probably avoid them until it's clear they have turned over a new leaf. I only use the command line version of McAfee because computers with McAfee's on demand scanner are unusable.

According to AV-Comparatives NOD32 has *recently* brought their definition coverage up to par. Because antivirus vendors are like blind horses with deaf riders running on separate tracks, they can fall behind for no obvious reason or move ahead entirely by accident. NOD32 will need to consistently hold a top position at AV-Comparatives and one of my other scanners will need to falter before I can trust Eset for scanning my heavily infested machines.

Don't think for a minute that just because Kaspersky is the best that there is no need for any other scanner. I randomly run Kaspersky before or after McAfee and it's quite clear that though each are excellent, relying on only just one will end in failure.

Moving customers from Symantec Antivirus to virtually anything else, whether reviewers say it's better or worse, reduced infections, usually to zero.

For any AV program I consider a fancy UI a detriment. Why are they spending money improving the UI when they could be spending money improving things that are useful: performance and detection?

[kinetix63 Veteran]

Thread closed and replaced with a new one for 2007