|
Posted by 1 of 1 on July 29, 2006, 8:37 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Say on a scale of 1 - 10, 10 being the best & 0 being a
waste of disk space, where would Kaspersky AV rate?
|
|
Posted by Sir_George on July 29, 2006, 9:09 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Say on a scale of 1 - 10, 10 being the best & 0 being a
> waste of disk space, where would Kaspersky AV rate?
A 9 or higher, right up there with Nod32 from ESet.
--
Sir_George
|
|
Posted by Leythos on July 29, 2006, 9:48 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Say on a scale of 1 - 10, 10 being the best & 0 being a
> waste of disk space, where would Kaspersky AV rate?
http://www.av-comparatives.org/
--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
|
|
Posted by MoonDog on July 29, 2006, 11:10 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Use NOD32 for anti-virus and use Kaspersky free scanner , you can't go wrong
for a anti - virus program
> Say on a scale of 1 - 10, 10 being the best & 0 being a waste of disk
> space, where would Kaspersky AV rate?
>
|
|
Posted by =?Utf-8?B?UGFuZGFfbWFu?= on July 30, 2006, 12:50 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Say on a scale of 1 - 10, 10 being the best & 0 being a
> waste of disk space, where would Kaspersky AV rate?
>
>
>
I give it only 7 . The detection rate is excellent (9.5) *but* scanning
speed is able to kill you :)
Virus Bulletin , June 2006
Tests on Windows XP , Scanning speed
NOD32 : 17 395,9 KB/s
Sophos : 6 501,5 KB/s
Symantec : 3 657,1 KB/s
McAfee : 4 179,5 KB/s
Kaspersky : 3 556,1 KB/s
AVG : 2 860,7 KB/s
--
Panda_man
Bronze level Contributor
|
|
XML site map