Deutsch
English
Français
Español
- Share:
13 security products in an endurance test: here are the best packages for Windows
Many consumer users don't see themselves as being in the crosshairs of cybergangsters. A major fallacy: because attackers are constantly foraging for interesting data, passwords or e-mail log-in details. This also includes entire Windows systems, as attacking botnets are always on the lookout for new PCs to enslave. In the latest endurance test over 6 months, 13 security products show how well they go the distance in protecting systems.
under Windows 10 and 11 from March to August 2024
Many consumer users don't see themselves as being in the crosshairs of cybergangsters. A major fallacy: because attackers are constantly foraging for interesting data, passwords or e-mail log-in details. This also includes entire Windows systems, as attacking botnets are always on the lookout for new PCs to enslave. In the latest endurance test over 6 months, 13 security products show how well they go the distance in protecting systems.
Most attacks on PC users occur via e-mail with dangerous attachments and links. Infected downloads and the theft of log-in data are also part of this threat potential. It is particularly worth noting, however, that the threat from ransomware poses one of the greatest risks. Good protection software has to cover all the specified risks and protect the user. The key challenge is to detect the attacker or attack, which is almost always launched with malware or dangerous scripts. These are the precise findings determined by the latest endurance test in the area of protection. In addition, the lab at AV-TEST also evaluates the system load of a security package and the resulting loss in performance. In the last test area, usability, the experts check whether the system protection creates lots of false alarms or can distinguish between friend and foe.
13 Windows protection packages included in the endurance test
The experts from AV-TEST evaluated 13 popular security packages for Windows in the lab over a period of 6 months. The test took place from March to August 2024 under Windows 10 and 11. Each month, all the products were subjected to a comprehensive test, all the results were collated, and points were awarded.
Included in the endurance test under Windows 10 and 11 were products from the following manufacturers: Avast, AVG, Avira, Bitdefender, EnigmaSoft, ESET, F-Secure, K7 Computing, Kaspersky, McAfee, Microsoft, Norton and Protected.net. All of the products were evaluated in terms of their protection, performance and usability. The lab can award up to 6 points for each test area, The top score achievable in the test is thus 18 points. The products had quite a lot on their plate, and the testers recorded a vast number of test scores for the end result. And this is very interesting: Among the 13 security packages evaluated in the endurance test, 12 reached a point score of between 17.2 and even 18 points. Only 4 products achieved the top score, however. They came from ESET, F-Secure, Kaspersky and McAfee. Only one product with a poorer performance ended up at the bottom of the table.
The 13 security packages for consumer users were evaluated under Windows 10 and 11 for a full 6 months in the lab – 4 products even achieved the full 18 points
The detection results clearly show how well the security products detected the attacking malware in the test, also over a period of 6 months
Defense against 50,000 Trojans and other malware
In the protection test over 6 months, the packages were required to detect over 1,000 zero-day malware samples, which the lab freshly unearthed regularly on the Internet and discovered in e-mails. That is the so-called real-world test. In addition, each package in each month also had to detect and fend off the repeatedly newly formed AV-TEST reference set: this amounted to over 50,000 additional malware samples.
6 products fended off the huge onslaught of attackers 100 percent in each of the two test phases. They were the security packages from Avast, AVG, Bitdefender, F-Secure, Kaspersky and Norton. This was followed nearly flawlessly by packages from Avira and McAfee with 99.9 percent and ESET with 99.7 percent. But all of them managed to deliver 100 percent on the reference set tests. Thus, all of the products mentioned received the full 6 points.
The security suites from K7 Computing, Microsoft and Protected.net committed minor errors in the real-world test and exhibited detection rates between 99.6 and 99.3 percent. However: all of the packages mentioned flawlessly completed the tests with the reference set. That is why the products received 5.8 and 5.7 points respectively for their final result.
Only EnigmaSoft committed more detection errors and thus had important points taken off. The result: 98.1 and 99.9 percent. The product only achieved 5.3 points on the protection score.
Who slows Windows down – and who doesn't
Perfect protection of Windows is vital, but it shouldn't overburden the PC performance. That is why the lab evaluates on both a standard and high-end PC without a security package how long specified routines take, thus arriving at reference times. The routines include visiting over 1,500 websites, along with the installation and launch of over 100 applications. What’s more, the testers additionally copy tens of thousands of files locally and onto the network.
For 7 of the 13 system watchdogs, the testers were satisfied with the extremely low additional system load. They came from ESET, F-Secure, Kaspersky, McAfee, Avast, Microsoft and K7 Computing. All these products received the top score of 6 points for their final result.
AVG and Bitdefender performed the routines a bit more slowly: both received 5.8 points. Avira and Norton also required somewhat more resources: both 5.7 points. Protected.net and EnigmaSoft demanded even more attention from the system. As a result, the two products only received 5.5 and 5.3 points respectively out of a possible 6.
The protection package made in Finland exhibited perfect performance in the endurance test and was thus rewarded the full 18 points
The security package from Kaspersky made an impressive showing in all the test disciplines of the endurance test, thus earning the top score of 18 points
6 points in each of the three test categories added up to the highest score of 18 points at the end of the endurance test
The system watchdog for Windows from McAfee delivered perfect work in all the tests, thus receiving the full 18 points
With 17.8 out of a possible 18 points, the free security package from Avast for Windows came in just below the top score
For its strong performance in the endurance test, the security package for Windows garnered 17.7 points – nearly the top score
What now: friend or foe?
Each protection software application is required to precisely filter out which files belong to an attacker and which are harmless and thus do not belong in a quarantine. In the test of friend-foe detection, i.e. false alarms, the products had to show how they would respond under everyday conditions. To do so, with active protection the lab visited thousands of websites that posed no threat. In addition, the team installed dozens of popular software applications and launched them. Finally, the lab copied over 1 million harmless files onto each test system – a routine repeated multiple times in the endurance test over 6 months.
The result of this test section is highly interesting, as many users assume that the products will be good at distinguishing between friend and foe. This assumption was also correct for the products from Avira, ESET, F-Secure, Kaspersky, McAfee, Microsoft and Protected.net. For millions of files, they either operated flawlessly or only slipped up on one occasion. For this good detection, the packages each earned the full 6 points.
The products from Avast, AVG, Bitdefender and Norton were a bit too restrictive, wrongly classifying a few harmless files. These minor errors cost points: all of them received 5.8 out of 6 points; K7 Computing even only 5.7 points.
EnigmaSoft sounded the alarm too often on innocuous files. This regularly cost a number of valuable points in the end. In the test for usability, i.e. false alarms, the package only scored 4.2 out of 6 points.
In the long run, only powerful protection helps
The endurance test involving protection software under Windows 10 and 11 clearly demonstrates that you can almost always depend on many products. The packages from ESET, F-Secure, Kaspersky and McAfee never got flustered in the many test months from March to August 2024. They worked reliably, thus earning the maximum point score of 18 points.
The security package from Avast barely missed the top score: 17.8 points. Coming in just behind it were Avira and Microsoft with 17.7 points, AVG and Bitdefender with 17.6 points, as well as K7 Computing and Norton with 17.5 points. Even Protected.net with 17.2 points still made a strong showing. Only in the case of EnigmaSoft there is some room for improvement: the 14.8 points achieved are somewhat too weak.
Some readers may be missing a few well-known names in the endurance test, such as AhnLab, Bkav, Microworld, Net Protector, PC Matic, Quick Heal, Surfshark or Trend Micro. This is due to the fact that they participated in individual tests, but not all tests from March to August 2024.
Additional results of the monthly tests sorted by manufacturers can be found on the AV-TEST website with test results under "The best Windows antivirus software for home users". At the bottom of the page, there is also the item "All tested manufacturers – listed by year/month". If you click on the logo of a manufacturer there, you'll receive an overview of all – the present and previous – tests from AV-TEST.
