Battle Avast or Kaspersky (On my friend's Request)

[Spirit]

Hi,here is my friend request who is just watching me posting at MalwareTips.
He want to see result in comparing between Avast Internet Security and Kaspersky Internet Security.

Thanks in advance for your vote and lets see what MT member decide that which is best overall protection.

 

[tapoo]

if paid license is the option, then i will surely go with Kaspersky......
i will go with Avast free/ CIS for freewares

 

[samit]

Both of them are very good products and has very good detection also offers lot of features.....but KIS is much more resource hog than Avast, so my vote goes for Avast.

 

[DxT-Baloch]

I well i will go for Avast its awesome & easy to use , i m using it now
kaspersky 2013 is also better but Avast is Avast Dude

 

[malbky]

Avast with its Autosandbox and BB offers a decent protection so you cant say that staying with KIS will make you more secure.
KIS is becoming more and more a slowdown. I am myself considering a switch.

 

[Nikos751]

I know VM testing is not considered reliable, but today when tested 2 same malware packs with KIS & Avast free, Avast blocked more malware from running than Kaspersky.
You 'll say it's not a proof blah blah.. you are probably right but this causes concerns to me.

 

[thepierrezou]

For me Kaspersky is better he have a great detection, hips and firewall

 

[Nikos751]

Well,
I found Avira better than both of them in my latest VM test. BUT ..VM testing? Many of us know that it cannot show the full potential of a layered security setup. Even testing in real systems is not easy to be reliable as noone exactly knows actually what malware usually comes to user PC's in real world (aka the real widespread malware which is not necessarily the same in every region of the world).
So,
1)VM testing can only be somewhat reliable for signatures & heuristics detection.
2)Even when using real system to test, it isn't easy to choose samples source.

What remains? Users experience and testing organisations. Unfortunately, every user is different so there is a chaos regarding opinions and suggestions out there.
So it's good to seek for evidence that comes from millions of people to see an average. For example cnet-download.com rating or elsewhere.
As for, testing organisations, do you trust fully trust them? Which of them? A grey zone..

Avast vs Kaspersky? Both are in general good for everyday users. Avast is buggier than Kaspersky. Kaspersky is said to be heavier but I 'm not sure about the latest versions compared.

 

[looda]

kis 2013 is very good but little heavy avast is light but detection rat not very good kis firewall is very strong avast is easy to handle so you should choose not me

 

[Oxygen]

Kaspersky is better.

 

[Rahadian Putra]

Both are good and decent products, and since we only can choose one, it's depends, if I have the money to buy both, I will choose KIS on my PC over Avast, but for my laptop, I choose Avast since it's light and good too!

My advice, try both..then decide which one is suite you more, because in the end..everything is depends on what we need and suite you better

 

[Iqbal]

I used Avast earlier and now using Kaspersky. My vote will go for Kaspersky. I don't know why but i feel much security with Kaspersky.

 

[Pankaj]

For better detection rate go for Kaspersky

 

[ZeroDay]

I know it all comes down to safe browsing habits and just being cautious in general, but in my honest opinion Avast! Isn't even in the same league as KIS.

 

[Littlebits]

Every time we have one of these polls about which is best, almost everyone votes for the product known to have to best protection according to AV testing sites which doesn't prove anything when it comes to the individual user.

Things to consider are system impact, false positives, price, support, features, etc.

So if you are a gamer or you like to experience the full potential of your system's speed then Kaspersky would not be a good choice since it will cause your system to have lags which can get on your last nerve.
The best option would be to use a free AV with Windows Firewall. If you watch your own actions when it comes to downloading and running files and utilize UAC, then you will not need a product with the highest detection rate. If you are a reckless user then use the money that you could pay for a security product to take educational classes about PC security, if you learn then you will never have to worry about wasting money again. Just just remember there is no hope for reckless users no matter if they buy the highest price PC security product, they will get infected.

Enjoy!!

 

[Oxygen]

Well,
I found Avira better than both of them in my latest VM test. BUT ..VM testing? Many of us know that it cannot show the full potential of a layered security setup. Even testing in real systems is not easy to be reliable as noone exactly knows actually what malware usually comes to user PC's in real world (aka the real widespread malware which is not necessarily the same in every region of the world).
So,
1)VM testing can only be somewhat reliable for signatures & heuristics detection.
2)Even when using real system to test, it isn't easy to choose samples source.

What remains? Users experience and testing organisations. Unfortunately, every user is different so there is a chaos regarding opinions and suggestions out there.
So it's good to seek for evidence that comes from millions of people to see an average. For example cnet-download.com rating or elsewhere.
As for, testing organisations, do you trust fully trust them? Which of them? A grey zone..

Avast vs Kaspersky? Both are in general good for everyday users. Avast is buggier than Kaspersky. Kaspersky is said to be heavier but I 'm not sure about the latest versions compared.

How did you find avira better?