In April 2009, the H1N1 pandemic influenza virus emerged as a novel influenza virus. The aim of this study was to compare the performances of several molecular assays, including conventional reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), two real-time reverse transcription (rRT)-PCRs, and two multiplex RTPCRs. A total of 381 clinical specimens were collected from patients (223 men and 158 women), and both the Seeplex RV7 assay and rRT-PCR were ordered on different specimens within one week after collection. The concordance rate for the two methods was 87% (332/381), and the discrepancy rate was 13% (49/381). The positive rates for the molecular assays studied included 93.1% for the multiplex Seeplex RV7 assay, 93.1% for conventional reverse transcription (cRT)-PCR, 89.7% for the multiplex Seeplex Flu ACE Subtyping assay, 82.8% for protocol B rRT-PCR, and 58.6% for protocol A rRT-PCR. Our results showed that the multiplex Seeplex assays and the cRT-PCR yielded higher detection rates than rRT-PCRs for detecting the influenza A (H1N1) virus. Although the multiplex Seeplex assays had the advantage of simultaneous detection of several viruses, they were time-consuming and troublesome. Our results show that, although rRT-PCR had the advantage, the detection rates of the molecular assays varied depending upon the source of the influenza A (H1N1)v virus. Our findings also suggest that rRT-PCR sometimes detected virus in extremely low abundance and thus required validation of analytical performance and clinical correlation.