The Verdict

By Tom's Guide France, published on May 21, 2009
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: , , | Themes: Software

17. The Verdict

At the conclusion of this comparison, we must first note that due to the constant evolution of PCs, the difference between the requirements in computing power for resident protection in free and paid-for anti-virus software is not nearly as important as it has been in the past. The distinction is still there, though, and is most obviously apparent in the time it takes to start up Windows.

We also noticed that, with regards to last year, almost all of the developers of the anti-virus software we reviewed in this comparison made significant efforts to add a new and better level of performance. That being said, we were able to form our picks for the best-in-class offerings for 2009.

Best Protection: As was the case last year, it is G-Data that gets this honor. Its engine is really impressive and is miles ahead of its competitors. However, there is a small negative point about this software: the 2009 version is even more power-hungry than the previous edition. Apart from G-Data, we really must also take our hats off to BitDefender, Trend, and McAfee for the paid-software contenders. 



Best Free Anti-Virus software: There was no contest with the freebie –Antivir was above and beyond its competition. Enough said.

For not-so-powerful PCs and gamers: With respect to anti-virus software, gamers and owners of older and less-powerful PCs come together in wants and needs. They need software that is as light as possible on the performance of their processors. For these requirements, it’s Norton that ekes out the win. After Norton, AVG and Comodo also gave us some pretty good results.

Comments | Print | Send to a friend

Sponsored links

Comments

shurcooL 05/21/2009 11:58 PM
Hide
-1+

And here I thought AVG Free was the best free antivirus.

Doctor Rob 05/22/2009 12:30 PM
Hide
--1+

Kaspersky internet security/ anti-virus does not look like that.. what the heck

Shadow703793 05/22/2009 12:46 PM
Show
spydeyrch 05/22/2009 12:56 PM
Hide
--2+

What about Microsoft's own Oncecare

Anonymous 05/22/2009 1:14 AM
Hide
-0+

These guys sound like they don't know what they are talking about. They claimed that Avast skips text files even though "they are a classic refuge for malevolent programs." Text files cannot be executed and therefore cannot contain viruses. The pictures they have are different as well. In any case I am a happy user of Avast and prefer it to McAfee and Norton but have not tried the others.

Anonymous 05/22/2009 1:35 AM
Hide
--1+

the picture they use for Avast is with a different skin. You can switch the skin at anytime.
I m using avast home too. I think the scanning for HD is bit longer and taxing a lot on my P4 2.6. But its free..no complain...

romain_75 05/22/2009 1:37 AM
Show
IzzyCraft 05/22/2009 1:42 AM
Hide
--1+

Spanish Kespersky = norman?

IzzyCraft 05/22/2009 1:43 AM
Hide
--1+

French... T_T?? not english there we go

Ciuy 05/22/2009 1:57 AM
Show
Anonymous 05/22/2009 3:37 AM
Hide
--1+

what I used to like on Tom's site was the use of graphs... can't find any in this round up. More over how the can you judge resident scan performance just on start up time? What about disk R/W after all services have been initialized?
Anyway quite poor article

Twoboxer 05/22/2009 6:28 AM
Hide
-3+

I use Norton NIS 2009, and have had problems that made me look for another. When I saw this article, I said "Great timing lol !"

Unfortunately, there is nothing in this article that inspires confidence in either the comparisons or the conclusions. There are comments about Norton that my personal experiences tell me are incorrect (at least in the US).

And, as said before, no tables, etc.

Very disappointing.

goose man 05/22/2009 8:05 AM
Hide
-0+

@Shadow703793: NOD32 is in page 14
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/2009-a [...] 15-14.html

@romain_75: Kaspersky in page 15
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/2009-a [...] 15-15.html

@shurcooL: So do I, use AVG for last 3 years thinking it was best one.
May be good time for change ...

dandy 05/22/2009 8:17 AM
Show
lumpoco 05/22/2009 9:31 AM
Hide
-6+

I'm very surprised to hear that Norton is not a resource hog. It is the reason I switched to free AV software like Avast and AVG. I'm not going back to Norton even if they paid me...OK I might consider it.

Anonymous 05/22/2009 9:39 AM
Hide
-0+

Why do you have pictures of Kaspersky on the page with AVG antivirus?

Anonymous 05/22/2009 9:52 AM
Hide
-0+

haha kapersky became norman.. avg became kepersky.. lol

falchard 05/22/2009 2:58 PM
Hide
-5+

Was this review bought or something? For Norton to get such a good review I am leaning towards it being bought. I mean c'mon, Norton not being a resource hog and stealing your system. How do you expect us to believe that?

Anonymous 05/22/2009 5:06 PM
Hide
-0+

Why not review Kaspersky Internet Security, instead of just the Antivirus, when the Internet Security package for other brands were reviewed?

Also, The KAV Internest Securitiy is $54.99 at Walmart. The review stated it was double.

I seriously have my doubts and found myself shaking my head after reading the reviews for several of the products in here.

bigbadbrad 05/22/2009 5:37 PM
Hide
-1+

I'm surprised you didn't give a "Best Value" award... I'd say for best value go with Trend Micro, for less than $20 you can get protection for 3 PCs for one year (Look online you will find it). I use it on all my computers and no complaints.


Comments are closed on this page.

Sponsored links