Battle: Kaspersky IS 2016 vs ESET Smart Security 2016 vs Bitdefender IS 2016 vs Emsisoft IS 10

If you come from Bitdefender then I would recommend you KIS2016, quite light; very effective. ESET is also a good option, Emsisoft same stuff. If you like smooth and less interactive protection ESET and Kaspersky would be better, Emsisoft is cool but a bit more interactive IMO.
 

For purely protection basis you may go to ESET SS 9 as you can tweak the HIPS for protection and their Sandbox (Banking) + so far the architecture (x64) isn't affected from performance.

KIS 2016 is a promising suite, however until now limited components working from prevention due to Windows 10 environment which the developers make a note to fix those issues; but overall a balance concept where you can tweak more from numerous components.

Somehow the system impact tends to be consistent as light for ESET than Kaspersky.

Still brace yourself to see those possible unique characteristics.
 

What kind of system do you have?
Panda and Avast are the lightest while Bitdefender can be heavy.

All 3 offer excellent protection (Avast requires tweaking; Bitdefender and Panda works out of the box), while Bitdefender is mainly known for its detection rate (signatures).

Try the 3 of them (trial versions, not the 6 months) and see which one you prefer.

In terms of UI, all 3 are user friendly.

Have a look here for Avast and Bitdefender info:
KIS 2016 vs NIS 2016 vs BIS 2016 vs Avast IS 2016 vs Trend Micro IS 2016
 

I would go with Eset, because it has good signatures, according to tests in the malware hub. It is also great at detecting adware
 

Most Internet Security products include anti-virus and firewall protection plus various other features depending on the software vendor...and for those reasons it is called a Security suite.I'm not an advocate of suites. All-in-one tools and suites are filled with extra features (including "bells & whistles") which typically use more system resources than separate programs that do the same task while other suites leave a much smaller footprint. Suites tend to have varying degrees of strengths and weaknesses accorded for each feature they incorporate. Internet Security Suites include a Firewall component, which IMO is unnecessary since the Windows built-in firewall is one of the best and provides adequate protection. Further, many folks also use a router which is essentially a hardware firewall.In contrast, separate tools are designed, built and maintained with a greater focus in a specific area so they are generally of better quality and more effective at what they are designed to do. This means the program's performance for that particular feature is usually superior than their all-in-one counterpart. Further, all-in-one tools generally do not allow the user as much flexibility in tailoring program settings and usage.HTG Explains: Why You Don’t Need a Full Internet Security SuiteIf you are adamant about using a suite, then I would recommend one of the following:Emsisoft Internet SecurityESET Smart SecurityKaspersky Internet SecuritySee my comments at the bottom of ... Read more

My choice ESET
 

If a security soft ranks amongst the top performing AVs, it won't matter much if it does function correctly or causes problems on your specific system.

From lab test results F-Secure has an edge over Panda during testing the past few years in terms of detection (although higher false positives).

From users, it seems more prefer Panda - which is one of Neil Rubenking's (PCMag) favs (that don't mean much - but that is just my opinion).

I'd say, in terms of overall protection, Panda has a slight edge; it might protect your system in a few instances that F-Secure will not.
 

If you have the money to purchase it, I would strongly recommend Kaspersky Internet Security 2016.
Overall, Kaspersky might not be as user friendly (many alerts when properly configured) and as light as Avast (Kaspersky always was a little hoggy, although that has been mostly fixed in the recent versions), however the security components of KIS are much more mature and powerful (when properly configured) than those of AIS.

In conclusions, if you have capable computer hardware and you don't mind a little bit of configuration and quite a few alerts, I would definitely recommend KIS.
If you believe that KIS might be too heavy for your system, and that you do not really visit suspicious sites and download suspicious applications, then I'd recommend AIS.
 

I'm a KIS 2016 user and I find it much lighter on system resources compared to the 2015 version. Yes, a KIS 15 key can activate up to KIS 18. I've stocked up on KIS 2015 keys. I brought like for 3 for £27.

With regards to how it compares to Bitdefender? Sorry I cannot comment as I've never used Bitdefender.
 

In my opinion, Norton gives you a better protection. He has SONAR( Behavior protection), very good feature.
Fsecure uses Bitdefender engine but isn't the best AV according AV Comparatives.
Norton is light, has strong firewall, good signatures and cloud reputation + Sonar protection for zero-day threats.
 

Lukajlo said:

↑



Do I need MalwareBytes Pro with BitDefender IS 2016?Click to expand...

in one word NO!
bitdefender is heavy enough to slow down your system...
 

You need to login to your bitdefender account - https://my.bitdefender.com/login

@WikiLeaks Mod Edit Notes: Post moved to new thread.

There are already similar questions with differing Poll results, but the comment I agree with was written by @hjlbx



hjlbx said:

↑



If you keep your software and OS updated - and aren't a high-risk user, then the probability of an exploit is low - something like less than 2 % according to industry data. Therefore, anti-exploit protection isn't needed - statistically - for the vast majority of users.

If you want layered protection, then anti-exploit is one of the basic layers.

My attitude towards exploits that they are very unlikely - yet still possible (true 0-Day). Therefore, I run all commonly exploited programs - browsers, Adobe products, office suites, archivers, etc - with limited file system and registry access rights using AppGuard. AppGuard will not prevent an exploit, but it will block the post-exploit actions. I have seen it stop a nasty exploit payload from altering the system.Click to expand...

Read: Question - Should I use a Exploit Protection Software?




Read: Question - Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit- Should I use it?




I highly recommend creating your own thread at, Security Configuration Wizard so we can get a better assessment about your system, software used and settings.
 

Few people realize that Bitdefender simply uses Windows Firewall and adds some policies to it. Windows Firewall does work rather well with outbound notifications...
 

I can only answer 3)
Yes, I have purchase twice from Amazon. I would avoid buying from other marketplace seller
 

Hi:

Thanks for posting.

I'm not shilling for KL or anything...

For the record, that KB article is > 1 month old (and predates patch (a), I think).
And lots of folks have upgraded to KIS/KAV/KTS 2017 under RS1 without issue.
BUT BUT Patch (b) has been in beta-testing for > 1 week, and is supposed to fix most of these issues:
https://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showtopic=356039

I guess it's sort of like AU/RS1 itself: you'll have either no problems or some problems.

Having said that, I lean a bit closer to the cautious Luddite side than to the adventurous "bleeding edge" side of things.
So, I am still on Win10 1511 and KIS 2016 for a while longer.
At my age, I like to take things slow and steady....

Cheers,
MM

Kaspersky already admits its lack of protection currently on Windows 10.
So, if this test is on Windows 10, then it is not reliable.
But if it is not on Windows 10, then KIS rocks definitely!
 

Kaspersky is consistently ranked near the top by anti-virus testing labs. Here's a comparison chart from AV comparatves web site: http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php?chart=chart2&year=2015&month=12&sort=1&zoom=2.
Pc magazine has a review of it as well. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2460689,00.asp
Performance is important but Another consideration is the usability of the software. Are you comfortable with the user interface? Is it easy to find out if your anti-virus definitions are up to date, configure scheduled scans, etc.

Its only Total Security Package? Where are the individual ones? The AV Plus, IS ?