Products to compare
eset internet security 12.0.31.0
avast premier 19.2.2364
Compare
Usability
Performance and System Impact
Computer protection (Antivirus engine, Heuristic engine)
Internet protection (Web Guard, Anti-Phishing, Antispam, Browser extension)
Proactive protection (Behavior blocker, HIPS, Sandbox)
Network protection (Firewall, Botnet protection)
Ransomware protection
Banking & Payments protection
Features

conceptualclarity

Level 21
Content Creator
Trusted
Verified
I'd give ESET the edge on being light on the system and on the firewall, and overall it has a lot more features and configuration possibilities.

I've also had Panda Pro recently, and I'd say Avast is way better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raiden

Nestor

Level 8
I would choose Avast,more effective generally and especially against zero day threats. I like Eset lightness and gui but seems to be working only with signatures, no bb, no trust at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefanos

devjit2018

Level 8
I would choose Avast,more effective generally and especially against zero day threats. I like Eset lightness and gui but seems to be working only with signatures, no bb, no trust at all.
I tend to disagree here. ESET has implemented a BB in the latest version and I hope it will continue to improve it. I prefer ESET anyday above Avast. In the right hands ESET(HIPS and Firewall when properly configured) can offer protection which Avast simply cannot. I am sick of Avast and their telemetry. In terms of lightness both are equal and the signatures of ESET are top notch. If you are a regular user you would be hard to get infected when using ESET since a regular home user has extremely slim chances to encounter a true zero day malware.
 

carsten ibsen

Level 22
Verified
Hello, I would go with Avast Premier(it also happens to be my AV and just for paranoia, I have Heimdal Premium & Voodoo-Shield Premium installed);)
 
  • Like
Reactions: stefanos

Nestor

Level 8
I tend to disagree here. ESET has implemented a BB in the latest version and I hope it will continue to improve it. I prefer ESET anyday above Avast. In the right hands ESET(HIPS and Firewall when properly configured) can offer protection which Avast simply cannot. I am sick of Avast and their telemetry. In terms of lightness both are equal and the signatures of ESET are top notch. If you are a regular user you would be hard to get infected when using ESET since a regular home user has extremely slim chances to encounter a true zero day malware.
Agree, but I am waiting to see a test for Eset to have good results, till now I haven't see any, especially against zero day threats with no signatures.I am also a regular user but from a paid av i expect something more to stand in competition.
 
Last edited:

Slyguy

Level 40

Faybert

Level 22
Malware Hunter
Verified
ESET. Avast is a pit of bugs and no privacy whatsoever, although I agree that the signatures are good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bribon77

RoboMan

Level 27
Content Creator
Verified
Pros :
Signatures : Avast slightly has better signatures and response to newer threats is better too ..Eset too is same however since Avast cloud (+AVG) is larger than Eset..response is slightly faster from what I seen.
Next Proactive detection : Avast beats Eset completely ..Cleanup against unknown malware is quite good.
Eset fails to remove any traces that are out of it's signatures. Behaviour based detection of Avast is vastly improved so it's blocking and cleanup + (AVG IDP) ..Eset hips is ok on tweaking but that cannot be replaced with BB .
Antiphishing of Avast is excellent over Eset. After AVG acquisition ..it's phishing capability at par with Trend and Webroot.
Avast is free ..that dominates Eset (Paid) in protection category ..
As far as PUP and Lightness is concerned Eset is the winner ..however pup detection should be enabled manually in both Avast and Avg.
Oh come on, my biggest respect with you mate, but this sounds a little fanatic. It hasn't been born yet a software that I have seen beating ESET in terms of phishing and unwanted software. I think the strongest point ESET has is its web filtering.
I can admit, yes, that it can be pretty weak against new malware if it's not correctly configured (yet can be very effective if you tweak it enough). Regarding adding malware to database, cannot speak about Avast since I don't know, but ESET is always one of the fastest.

Nevertheless I can confirm ESET relies a lot on its signatures, hence why they are so fast at updating their databases. I would love to see an improvement here in the future. A decent behaviour blocker or a defautl deny module is urgently needed.
 

Threadripper

Level 4
ESET has had neural networks since 1997 and LiveGrid way outperforms Avast's cloud component/live signatures which they added sometime around 2010, I remember, I was using it.
Oh come on, my biggest respect with you mate, but this sounds a little fanatic. It hasn't been born yet a software that I have seen beating ESET in terms of phishing and unwanted software. I think the strongest point ESET has is its web filtering.
Couldn't agree more, ESET license Zvelo plus use their own web filtering and getting anything past it is difficult. Same reason the Gryphon router uses ESET over pure Zvelo.
 

ικανότητα

New Member
Pre-moderated
ESET is written in assembly
A majority of ESET for Windows is written in C and C++ .

The UI is highly reliant on HTML, CSS & TIScript.

C:
eamonm.sys
edevmon.sys
ekbdflt.sys
epfw.sys
eelam.sys

C++:
ehdrv.sys
concrt140.dll
eamsi.dll
eCapture.exe

I can keep doing this all day but it proves nothing .

They can still explicitly use Assembly in any of the C or C++ projects with inline for 32-bit or linking the *.obj file/s for 32-bit/64-bit. who cares ?

If the product works well then who cares what language it is written in ?