Microsoft's OneCare takes last place in anti-virus evaluation


Recommended Posts

The top dog in the tests was G Data Security's AntiVirusKit

March 01, 2007 -- Microsoft's Windows Live OneCare came in dead last out of a group of 17 anti-virus programs tested against hundreds of thousands of worms, viruses, Trojan horses and other malware, an Austrian anti-virus researcher reported yesterday.

The AV Comparatives Web site, which is maintained by Andreas Cleminti from Innsbruck, Austria, posts quarterly results of tests that pit the top anti-virus products against a dynamic list of nearly half a million individual pieces of malware.

Top dog, according to Cleminti's tests, was G Data Security's AntiVirusKit (AVK), which nailed 99.5% of the malicious code. Not far behind were AEC's TrustPort AV WS, at 99.4%, Avira's AntiVir PE Premium, at 98.9%, MicroWorld's eScan Anti-Virus, at 97.9%, F-Secure's Anti-Virus, at 97.9%, and Kaspersky Labs' AV, which stopped 97.9% of the malware.

Better known products such as Symantec's Norton Anti-Virus and McAfee's VirusScan posted results of 96.8% and 91.6%, respectively.

Holding the bottom spot was Microsoft's Windows Live OneCare, the consumer security suite that the Redmond, Wash. developer launched last year. OneCare took care of just 82.4% of the malware.

Cleminti also tested the 17 products against polymorphic viruses, those which produce sometimes vast numbers of variants as they try to sneak by scanners. "The results of the polymorphic test are of importance because they how flexible an anti-virus scan engine is and how good the detection quality of complex viruses is," said Cleminti in his write-up.

Only Symantec's Norton AntiVirus and ESET's NOD32 Anti-Virus caught every variant of the 12 polymorphic families, he said. In that test, OneCare placed 15th, detecting every version of only two families, and missing seven of the polymorphic families completely.

Cleminti's report is available online (download PDF).

This is not the first evaluation to give a Microsoft security program a black eye. Last week, for example, Australian security company PC Tools released research that claimed Windows Defender -- Microsoft's anti-spyware title -- detected just 46% to 53% of spyware.

"We are looking closely at the methodology and results of the test to ensure that Windows Live OneCare performs better in future tests," a Microsoft spokesperson said.

Source: Computerworld

Not to be too off topic, but the antivirus programs that took top honours... I've never heard about them before and now I'm intrigued ;)

OneCare... well that's not surprising based on what has already been said about the program, I'm just curious how this would be allowed to happen. I would assume they'd have plenty to test their product against

Took me long to find it. (Well, 1 minute is long to find the real site of the "best" antivirus IMO)

http://www.gdata.de/trade/productview/727/16/

Btw, for people saying that it's good for MS's first entry, let me says that MS actually brought a company of Antivirus and a company of anti-spyware for making One Care in 2005...

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/72600/microsof...-consumers.html

Edited by Nienor
Took me long to find it. (Well, 1 minute is long to find the real site of the "best" antivirus IMO)

http://www.gdata.de/trade/productview/727/16/

Btw, for people saying that it's good for MS's first entry, let me says that MS actually brought a company of Antivirus and a company of anti-spyware for making One Care in 2005...

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/72600/microsof...-consumers.html

Well yes they bought the company to make the software. But its them who are doing the virus finding and updates yeh?

The previous team that was working on the previous software from the previous company with some new MS people to put this together :p

I simply mean that is not a "new" start...

to many charts

best antivirus is?

Check the summary PDF? The answer depends on your needs. Not only detection accuracy plays a role, but feature sets too.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/erge...summary2006.pdf

I personally use and recommend NOD32 for great detection rates, fast speed, configurability, and frequent updates. That AV also takes the prize as Overall Winner in this test. Kaspersky is often brought forward as having near top scores in accuracy, but it lacks e.g. heuristic scans like NOD32 that can occasionally be useful in very sudden virus outbreaks. I'd avoid anything Symantec/Norton as many agree it has low performance. We also missed good enterprise-scale monitoring features in the Corporate Edition of Symantec Antivirus here. Try AVG or Avast! if you're a home user that can't stomach paying for it. :)

Edited by Jugalator
Check the summary PDF? The answer depends on your needs. Not only detection accuracy plays a role, but feature sets too.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/erge...summary2006.pdf

The 2006 tests are totally outdated, and the test results are not valid anymore!

Look at the actual test results from February 2007 which just got released, things changed quite a bit:

http://www.av-comparatives.org/

Here are the results from the 2007 report pdf:

av-comparatives-feb07.png

As you can see, Nod32 did even worse than Symantec! :blink:

Anyone ever use this AntiVirusKit? If so, how is it?

I'm actually using it since last december (screenshot) and the system resources usage is pretty acceptable IMO (the maker claims this 2007 version is around 30% lighter from previous version). However, I had to make some tweaking on it disabling certain options (did also a custom install) in order to suit AVK 2007 to my needs.

Btw, AVK uses two antivirus engines, the current 2007 version includes the Kaspersky+Avast! engines.

Former 2006v. was Kasp+BitDefender :shiftyninja:

The BBC has just picked this up: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6418965.stm

Windows fails second virus test

The OneCare software has failed two independent tests. Microsoft's Live OneCare security software has failed tests which check how well it spots and stops malicious programs designed to attack Windows.

OneCare was the only failure among 17 anti-virus programs tested by the AV Comparatives organisation. Microsoft's software only spotted 82.4% of the 500,000 viruses that the independent group subjected it to. The test is the second in less than a month that Microsoft's anti-virus software has failed.

Batfink

Who really uses CareOne! If you really want a antivirus program, you are better off buying a third party software, then using CareOne.

Exactly. No one with at least one working brain cell left would use that OneCare crap :x

Absolutely any other AV is better - even Norton :pinch:

Exactly. No one with at least one working brain cell left would use that OneCare crap :x

Absolutely any other AV is better - even Norton :pinch:

I have several working brain cells and I use OneCare on my laptop. It works fine for me, not to mention that I'm very good about avoiding any suspicious files. Please don't assume that everyone who uses this program doesn't know any better.

I have several working brain cells and I use OneCare on my laptop. It works fine for me, not to mention that I'm very good about avoiding any suspicious files. Please don't assume that everyone who uses this program doesn't know any better.

You mean you knowingly wasted money on a crap program that placed last in the AV test, even though you knew better? :blink:

That doesn't sound very smart to me, not at all :pinch:

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • AMD RX 9070 GRE AI, Blender benchmarks vs 9070 XT, 7800XT, Nvidia RTX 5070, 4070 by Sayan Sen Earlier this week, we shared the first part of our review of AMD's new RX 9070 GRE. It was about the gaming performance of the GPU, and we gave it an 8 out of 10. As a follow-up, similar to how we did with the 9070 XT and non-XT, we are doing a dedicated productivity review for the RX 9070 GRE as well, where we compare it against the 9070 XT, 9070, 7800 XT, as well as Nvidia's 5070 and 4070. This will include AI, rendering, compute, and more benchmarks. AI performance, especially, is a very important metric in today's world, and AMD also promised big improvements thanks to its underlying architectural improvements. We will be pitching it against the data we already have for the RX 9070, and RX 9070 XT, but also the Nvidia 5070 FE, MSI GeForce RTX 4070 VENTUS 2X 12G, and Gigabyte Radeon RX 7800 XT GAMING OC 16G as they are in a similar price class, but also because we do not have a comparable 5060 Ti card lying around here that we can compare it against. Before we get underway, this is a collaboration between Sayan Sen and Steven Parker, who lent me his test bed. Also, there was no editorial input from AMD. First up, the specs of the RX 9070, 9070 XT, and 9070 GRE, which were given to us by AMD: Radeon RX 9070 GRE Radeon RX 9070 Radeon RX 9070 XT Boost Clock: Game Clock: up to 2.79GHz up to 2.20GHz up to 2.52GHz up to 2.07GHz up to 2.97GHz up to 2.40GHz Stream Processors 3,072 (48 CU) 3,584 (56 CU) 4,096 (64 CU) Ray Accelerator 48 56 64 AI Accelerator 96 112 128 ROPs 96 128 Texture Mapping Units 192 224 256 Memory 12 GB GDDR6, 18Gbps Clock, 192-bit Bus 432 GB/s 16 GB GDDR6, 20Gbps Clock, 256-bit Bus Effective Memory Bandwidth: 640 GB/s Infinity Cache 48 MB (3rd Gen) 64 MB (3rd Gen) Card Bus PCI-E 5.0 X16 Output 2x HDMI 2.1b 2x DisplayPort 2.1a Power consumption 220W 304W Recommended PSU 650W 750W Slot width 2x 3x Price (SEP) $549 $599 As you can see from the specs above, it is less than the standard RX 9070 in every way that counts, except for slightly higher Boost and Game clock speed. Design Moving on, the RX 9070 GRE we were given is an XFX Swift triple-fan, dual-slot design with two 8-pin connectors. At 30cm (self-measured), it will fit in most systems easily. There is no RGB either. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE by XFX from all angles. Test system Our test system consists of the following: Lian Li O11 Dynamic Mini V2 Flow (Amazon|Newegg) ASUS Z890 ProArt Creator WiFi (Amazon|Newegg) Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus (Amazon|Newegg) Thermal Grizzly KryoSheet - 44x37 (Amazon|Newegg) 2x 16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB (7200 MT/s in XMP) (Amazon|Newegg) Sabrent Rocket4 Plus 2TB SSD (Amazon) Windows 11 25H2 (Build 26200.8246) AMD shared a press driver based on the recently released Adrenaline 26.5.2 that we were required to use. We now move on to our benchmarks. First up, we have Geekbench AI running on ONNX. For some reason, the 9070 GRE does exceptionally well here in both half-precision (FP16) and single-precision (FP32). It manages to beat the RTX 5070 and RX 9070 non-XT, and is only behind the 9070 XT. Since Geekbench runs in short bursts instead of continuously hammering the graphics card, it seems the GRE's faster boost clocks are helping here. Next up, we move to the UL Procyon AI test suite, starting with the image generation benchmark. We chose the Stable Diffusion XL FP16 test since it is the most intense workload available on Procyon. The Nvidia cards do very well here, as even the 4070 out-muscles AMD's best fairy easily. The positive thing about the GRE is that it gets quite close to the 9070 non-XT in this test; this indicates that the VRAM does not play a very big role here, as SD XL relies on float16 (FP16). So this is something to keep in mind again. If you wish to work with float32 AI workloads, graphics cards with larger than 12 GB buffers would likely emerge as victors. Regardless, the gains are still massive on AMD's 9000 series compared to the 7000 series. Following image generation, we move to the text generation benchmark. This is one test where the 9070 GRE struggled, quite a lot. It seems that the 12 GB VRAM and lower memory bandwidth of the new Radeon 9070 GRE are hurting it quite a bit; the split is massive, especially in a test like Llama2, which packs 13 billion parameters. As such, in all the tests, the 9070 GRE is the slowest of the lot. Next, we tried Blender, and here the AMD GPUs were beaten by Nvidia. Rendering is something the Green team has always had a lead over the Red side, and it has not changed so far. On the positive side, though, the 9070 GRE shows significantly better results than the 7800 XT, which means AMD is on the right path. Catching up to Nvidia, though, will require a lot more effort. And we hope HIP and ROCm can keep improving. Wrapping up AI testing, we measured OpenCL throughput in the Geekbench compute benchmark. The RX 9070 GRE alongside the 9070 did not fare well here at all, even falling behind the 7800 XT. Interestingly, even the RTX 5070 could not beat the 4070 on OpenCL, so perhaps this suggests that OpenCL optimization may not have been a priority for either AMD or Nvidia in the modern era. Conclusion We reached the end of our productivity performance review of the 9070 GRE, and we have to say it's a mixed bag. Unlike the 9070 and 9070 XT, the GRE excels in some areas while losing ground fairly easily in others. Similar to how it happened in gaming, any time the card's memory subsystem gets hammered, it tends to fall behind the others. This was the case with text generation, wherein we saw the VRAM sometimes hit its maximum available 12 GB of usage with larger model sizes. So what do we make of the RX 9070 as a productivity hardware? It can certainly be used, but you have to know it has its limitations. For those looking for a GPU that can deal with more, AMD recently unveiled the Radeon AI PRO R9700, which is essentially a 32 GB refresh of the 9070 XT with some additional workstation-based optimizations. On a similar note, the new Ryzen AI Halo platform is something you can consider if you want to set up a local AI processing station. Considering everything, we rate AMD's Radeon RX 9070 GRE a 7.5 out of 10 for its productivity performance. Price is less of a factor for those looking at productivity cases compared to those considering the GPU for gaming, and as such, we felt it did quite decently on many occasions and can be handy if you need a 12 GB GPU and, for some reason, don't want to get Nvidia. Purchase links: RX 9070 / XT / GRE (Amazon US) As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Does anyone here know if these updates are integrated into the UUP dump isos?
    • Motrix Next 3.9.4 by Razvan Serea Motrix Next is a modern, open-source cross-platform download manager built as the official next-generation successor to the original Motrix project. It has been completely rewritten using Tauri 2, Vue 3, TypeScript, and Rust, while still relying on the powerful Aria2 download engine for high-speed multi-protocol transfers. The app supports HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, BitTorrent, ED2K and magnet links, offering advanced features like multi-connection acceleration, task scheduling, bandwidth control, and batch download management. With a significantly reduced install size (around 20MB), it focuses on being lightweight, fast, and resource-efficient compared to traditional Electron-based download tools. Designed for Windows, macOS, and Linux, Motrix Next delivers a clean, modern UI inspired by Material Design 3 principles, with smooth animations and a minimal workflow. It improves usability through better download organization, system tray integration, and enhanced torrent handling including selective file downloads and tracker management. Motrix Next features: Multi-protocol downloads — HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, Magnet, .torrent, ED2K, and Metalink tasks BitTorrent — Selective file download, DHT, peer exchange, encryption controls, metadata caching, GeoIP peer flags, and tracker probing Browser extension integration — Embedded Extension API with independent authentication, download confirmation, smart auto-submit, filename hints, referer/cookie forwarding, and real-time controls (Chrome Web Store · Edge Add-ons) Safe filename handling — Content-Disposition, RFC 2047, non-UTF-8, percent-encoded, and extensionless URL resolution with path traversal sanitization Download organization — Favorite and recent folders, optional file-type categorization, stale-record cleanup, and completed history backed by SQLite Concurrent downloads — Independent controls for active tasks, HTTP connections per server, segments per file, and BT peer limits Speed control — Global and per-task upload/download limits with day-of-week and time-of-day scheduling System integration — Tray operation, optional tray speed display, macOS Dock badge/progress, protocol handlers for magnet://, thunder://, and motrixnext:// Lightweight mode — Destroys the WebView on minimize-to-tray while Rust keeps the engine, task monitor, notifications, history, and extension routing alive Notifications and power options — Native task start/complete/failure notifications, keep-awake during downloads, and optional shutdown after completion Network controls — Scoped proxy support for downloads, app updates, and tracker updates, plus system proxy detection Auto-update channels — Stable, Beta, and Latest Across Channels policies with separate download and install phases Diagnostics — Structured logs, exportable diagnostic ZIPs, database integrity checks, automatic DB rebuild, and Linux GPU rendering fallback Personalization — Light/dark/system theme, 10 color schemes, 26 languages, and first-launch system language detection Motrix Next 3.9.4 changelog: Motrix Next 3.9.4 promotes the 3.9.4 beta cycle to stable. This release refreshes bundled engine binaries, improves task detail readability and copy actions, expands link handling for magnet and ED2K workflows, polishes responsive navigation and text wrapping, updates browser extension documentation, and refines network preference controls. New Features Task Detail copy actions — Added copyable values for task metadata and reusable render functions for long text fields. Magnet and ED2K lifecycle support — Added task lifecycle handling for magnet and ED2K links. History cleanup for deleted tasks — Deleted tasks can now remove matching history records. User-Agent management — Added user-agent management and improved related network preference controls. Browser extension documentation — Added the Firefox Add-ons link for the Motrix Next extension. Improvements Engine binaries — Updated bundled binaries for supported architectures. Task Detail readability — Long task names, URLs, tracker values, and copyable metadata now render more clearly. Deletion messaging — Refined localized task deletion text for clarity and consistency. Text wrapping — Improved URI input wrapping and task name multiline display. Navigation layout — Improved sub-navigation responsiveness. Disk allocation default — Changed the default file allocation method to trunc. Proxy controls — Improved proxy button styling in network preferences. Download: Motrix Next 64-bit | ARM64 | macOS ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Links: Website | macOS / Linux | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NVIDIA officially supports Ubuntu, as linked above with the GeForce NOW Hands on I did in collaboration with Paul Hill.
    • TO be clear I am not running linux today, however I keep thinking about it. And I want to make sure there are minimal obstacles if I decide to make that switch in the coming months.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      250
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!