#AVIRA VS BITDEFENDER WINDOWS 8.1#

ThreatTrack, however, caught a pitiful 78.3 percent. Nearly half the programs tested caught everything most caught over 98 percent. The real difference comes when you get to 0-day malware, which is yet to be documented widely but is possible to spot based on patterns. But Comodo was shown to be particularly weak here, catching only 96.1 percent of the known malware that should be easy to spot. Many, including Kaspersky and BitDefender, caught absolutely everything.

The chart makes for an interesting overview, but download the complete report and you can dig more into the specifics.įor example: At this point, most applications catch over 99 percent of well-known malware. Usability, which rates how many false positives a given application shows users after testing.īy these metrics, the best possible antivirus will detect nearly all actual malware, will not use up a lot of system resources, and will not see malware where none exists.Performance, which rates how much a given application impacts your system while running.Protection, which rates how effective a given application is at detecting viruses.The results, outlined in the chart above, add findings based on three different ratings:

#AVIRA VS BITDEFENDER WINDOWS 8.1#

The firm’s December 2015 results for Windows 8.1 devices compared 20 different anti-malware programs for protection, performance, and usability.

That’s according the latest round of tests by AV Test, an independent IT security institute based in Megdeburg, Germany. ThreatTrack and Comodo, meanwhile, are among the worst.

Fitbit Versa 3Īleksej Penkov/123rfIf you want the best virus protection out there, Kaspersky, Bitdefender, and Avira are the top three.

Avira vs bitdefender