Windows 7 anti-malware products compared

Windows 7 anti-malware products compared

Summary: Independent test lab AV-Test Institute compared 34 anti-malware/Internet security products for home and business users on Windows 7 64-bit. Trend Micro came out on top for business; Bitdefender, Kaspersky and Qihoo for consumer.

TOPICS: Security, Windows

AV-TEST Institute, an independent test lab specializing in anti-malware, has released the results of their latest tests of anti-malware products. These tests were run on 64-bit Windows 7 in January and February of this year.

The tests compared nine business products and 25 consumer products. The products were compared for detection of malware, including 0-day malware for which the products had no signature; performance impact on the system; and false positive detections and warnings.

Among the business products, Trend Micro Office Scan 10.6 had the highest score, followed closely by Bitdefender Endpoint Security and G Data AntiVirus Business. The top consumer products were Bitdefender Internet Security, Kaspersky Lab Internet Security, and Qihoo 360 Internet Security.

Quite a few of the products detected 100% of the malware in the protection tests, including four of the business products (Trend Micro, Bitdefender, G Data, and F-Secure) and six of the consumer products (Bitdefender, Kaspersky Lab, Trend Micro, G Data, Microworld, and F-Secure). The average detection score for 0-day malware was 94 percent. The lowest scores were for Microsoft Security Essentials, which AV-Test uses as a baseline score against which to rank all the other products.

Six consumer products tied with the best score for impact on system performance: Bitdefender, Kaspersky Lab, Qihoo, McAfee, Symantec, and Tencent. Norman, PCKeeper, and especially ThreatTrack scored badly here. Among the business products, Trend Micro Office Scan got the highest possible score, with the other products, particularly the McAfee and Symantec products, noticeably lagging. 

Five of the business products got the top score for false positives, but only two — Bitdefender and G Data — had no false positives at all. Fourteen consumer products got a top score for false positives and four had no false positives in the tests: Bitdefender, Avira, Panda Security, and PC Keeper.

The complete list of products tested, including version numbers follows:

Business Products Consumer Products

Topics: Security, Windows

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • And the rankings are...?

    Am I the only one who isn't seeing where the rankings actually are. There's the list of subjects tested and some random mentioning of how some of them did, but I would actually like to see the list of how some of the ones that weren't mentioned actually did. Apart from BitDefender in the consumer column, those are alphabetical lists.
    • Link to results..
      • Thank you for the link.

        Just wish they included ALL the results and listings of what threats were missed.
  • Trend Micro did not score best

    Bitdefender scored better than Trend Micro on protection and false warnings, the only things that matter for security products. This is true for both business and consumer (look at the actual results by clicking on entries in "Producer: Product"). Bitdefender has been at the top for a few years now, contending with F-Secure (which slipped this time) and Kaspersky. Trend Micro was slightly better on performance, but that is not why people buy anti-virus.
    • Performance Efects

      Granted, a security program that doesn't catch malware is useless. But if it drags down your system to point where you can't get anything done, it's also useless. It's supposedly better now, but I dropped McAfee years back because it would periodically cripple my computer for long stretches. So those aren't quite the only things that matter.
  • More then just definitions

    If a AV product is not looking at file reputation (comparing hash) and behaviour activities (heuristics) then its not really worth the price no matter how good the defs are.

    Then of course there is VDI awareness and footprint, distributive technology (repeaters/mirrors, P2P/Mesh), network traffic, etc. You also need to consider different posturing such as in office and out of office, firewall configurations, provisioning, etc.

    Not suggesting one product over another but simply these findings does not really tell you which product you should buy (maybe which products you should not buy).
    Rann Xeroxx
  • and why don't we see

    Malwarebytes in this list? It has been the best pc protection I've ever tested, and I've tested them all. It plays well with Microsoft Security Essentials also, making for a rock solid team, and believe me I don't say this lightly as I'm no MS fan!
    • Probably didn't want to participate

      Whenever you see a major name not in an AV-Test report it's almost certainly that they didn't want to participate. AV-Test doesn't test in those cases.
      • That's not it

        Malwarebytes does not pretend to offer a primary anti-virus solution. It is intended to be a supplement and works very well in that role.

        Symantec often chooses not to participate in AV-Comparatives' test, but that's a different story.
  • Where Is The Rest of This Article?

    The title says "...products compared." Where is the comparison? What is the basis for the comparison? What were the results for each product tested?
    • The first link in article

      AV-TEST Institute,
      • Re: The first link

        Thank you for the link(s)! I went and checked it out. The top ones were only pubic hairs apart in their ratings, almost like splitting the atom! From what I could see the top 3 appeared to be Bitdefender, Kaspersky, and Qihoo( I don't know if I'd trust a Chinese company with all the snooping and malware coming from China now a days to protect my PC)! Followed closely by Symantec and McAfee. I lost COMPLETE faith in McAfee years back as they had a very, very miserable track record for a few years!
        But I'd say if one was running anyone of the top 5 one is pretty well protected! What REALLY surprised me was that the MS Security package was next to LAST in the ratings. Only one other (AhnLab) was worse than MS at protecting ones PC!! LMAO!
        The middle ground was pretty much that, middle ground. Quite a few fell into that mix! They tested 25(consumer products) in all, if you remove the top 5 and the worst 2 (7 total) one is left with 18 middle ground.

        While Larry DID in fact name the top 3 consumer products. When he listed the products tested he, IMO, should have listed them by RANKING!! Not just a list, it would have been "MORE Informative" for the average reader! Just my thoughts! NOT to mention, the list has Bitdefender (#1-BEST) followed by AhnLab (#25-WORST)! If one just looks at the list, it could be MISINTERPRETED!
        • Reply to myself

          Even the AV-Test site web page has the list hodge-podge. It's in alphabetical order. NOT by ranking! Also somewhat misleading. Even their test report numbers(?) are not by ranking. I guess(?) they are by the order they were tested in????? One REALLY needs to decipher the results on their page!!!!!
          I tried to decipher it with the top 5 and worst 2 ratings!!
  • Surpised not to see Vipre mentioned

    Perhaps its as Larry above said, maybe they didn't want to participate, it would be good to know who didn't want to participate and maybe why, I have been using Vipre for a while and back it up with the online version of Trend Micro's Housecall and have been lucky .... so far.
    • Correction

      ThreatTrack: VIPRE Internet Security is on the list at the results page and pretty far down when it comes to protection, may need to rethink my security software.
  • Webroot Secure Anywhere

    Why is it I never see Webroots software in any of the lists? It has many advantages over many of the other programs out there and is highly recommended.
  • 94% Zero Day Detection

    That is pretty high detection for Zero day. To have some of the engines catch all of it is very impressive, boarding on skeptical. I still think you can't rely on just 1 AV. Having layers of security and multiple AV engines is still the best method.