Battle ESET vs Bitdefender

Status
Not open for further replies.
PrMi

PrMi

Level 3
Thread author
Verified
Aug 25, 2014
115
192
166
Hi, I am wondering which is better for me, in terms of protection and performance.
I need one which gives great performance, good signatures and zero day protection, and low impact of system.
Which do you think is better?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Piteko21
Sort by date Sort by votes
Hi, ESET gives you better performance, has great signatures ( zeroday protection is almost inexistente) but its fast updating their signatures so he catch alot of new threats and with lw impact.

Bitdefender has great detection but is more heavy in system and some users report slow internet conexion with Bitdefender web shield.

I already used both AV( currently I use ESET) so Its my opinion according my experience;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: dhwan and PrMi
Upvote 0 Downvote
I just want to tell u that here are much eset "fanboys" they will vote for eset anyway without a statement or knowlegend. so u can chose eset. (I would chose bitdefender),better zero day protection,the newer versions are quit light(lighter than eset on my system),low false positives and bitdefender becomes less buggy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PrMi and Piteko21
Upvote 0 Downvote
Janl92l said:
I just want to tell u that here are much eset "fanboys" they will vote for eset anyway without a statement or knowlegend. so u can chose eset. (I would chose bitdefender),better zero day protection,the newer versions are quit light(lighter than eset on my system),low false positives and bitdefender becomes less buggy.
Click to expand...

bitdefender less buggy and improving performance? good to know...

you are right. bitdefender has best zero day protection tecnologies: B-have, AVC( active virus control) to catch new and unknow threats... but when I use it they slow a bit my net conexion:( and when my 2015 - 6 months licency ends, I change to ESET.

I think that is a Dilema between performance and protection, ESET has "less proctive technology" than Bitdefender. If you want protection- Bitdefender is the deal. ESET can protect you but against very recent threats no. ... in version 9 "beta" he block all the unknown threats so its improving...

PS: I'm not a "ESET fanboy":p ...I love Bitdefender, was hard for me living Bitdefender after 3 years on my computer and without any malware.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Venustus and PrMi
Upvote 0 Downvote
Piteko21 said:
bitdefender less buggy and improving performance? good to know...

you are right. bitdefender has best zero day protection tecnologies: B-have, AVC( active virus control) to catch new and unknow threats... but when I use it they slow a bit my net conexion:( and when my 2015 - 6 months licency ends, I change to ESET.

I think that is a Dilema between performance and protection, ESET has "less proctive technology" than Bitdefender. If you want protection- Bitdefender is the deal. ESET can protect you but against very recent threats no. ... in version 9 "beta" he block all the unknown threats so its improving...

PS: I'm not a "ESET fanboy":p ...I love Bitdefender, was hard for me living Bitdefender after 3 years on my computer and without any malware.
Click to expand...
Yes, I saw "The pc security channel" review of eset beta... Got a clean sheet :D
Well, also, most of us don't deal with recent malware, so ESET is better...
Also, Bitdefender is a lot buggier than ESET. I have never seen ESET crashing. But, I have seen Bitdefender facing critical failure.
So according to everything I feel both are good at their fields. Bitdefender at Sigs, and zero day and ESET at Sigs and performance.
So I conclude
ESET=Bitdefender
But, I will use ESET because it provides low impact and better performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Piteko21
Upvote 0 Downvote
We can compare about their identical characteristics:

ESET = more in-detailed/comprehensive techniques which malware/viruses are no way to slip as possible especially in zero day but of course when bypass, a configured HIPS should take care for that.
Contains sandbox components for detecting and run in a isolated environment for analysis.

Bitdefender - optimal detection rates but if bypass then AVC should blocked any suspicious actions without any user interaction. B-Have also acts a sandbox component for analyzing the samples.

In stability well Free version of Bitdefender is fine as I test but that could vary on paid ones. ESET totally proves on well fine resource consumption on the system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Venustus and PrMi
Upvote 0 Downvote
Really helpfull reply! Thanks! I have switch to ESET Smart Security 8, does anyone have a key??
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I agree Bitdefender can be quite heavy on the system, personally I have not used ESET so I cannot comment on that but from my experience with Bitdefender I think I might not go back. Don't get me wrong their protection is really good, but with bitdefender, start up can be quite slow, and during their updates my computer is almost unusable. And I'm actually using quite a powerful laptop so there should be no reason for this.

I had bitdefender for 6 months with the trial and it occasionally crashed on me (less than 5 times over the use of 6 months). My advice is actually to test it out first, take their 30 day free trial and see how it plays with your computer, some people have reported that it has been very buggy but personally I feel that the bugs can be tolerated with except the one with the update that causes my computer to become very very slow.

Might test out ESET with their free trial some time soon, but I'm quite content with my antivirus right now. :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Recently I move to Eset after more than year with Bitdefender (see my post at here forum before).
sometime if I must remove threat from removable device, bitde need more and more time, and sometime like no change.
But now with Eset it's very fast, I not boring to wait more time
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

You may also like...