- May 17, 2014
- 179
Bitdefender Internet Security 2015 vs ESET Smart Security 7
- Thread starter Anurag Kuradia
- Start date
- Status
- Jun 22, 2013
- 634
So you think this site is just "clueless fanboys" of Eset? I personally feel that the people on this site possess alot of knowledge regarding computer security and there are varying opinions on this site. Eset is popular because it's a solid product with high detection of malware and pups without a lot of false positives and is very light on the system and the TRUTH is that Bitdefender has alot of false positives and is heavier on resources and can be buggy at times, just the facts no fanboyism! And to be clear about detection just look at the tests done here with malware packs and Eset kills Bitdefender
. Saying all that I still feel Bitdefender is a solid product to protect your pc but Eset is a cut above IMO.
- Oct 23, 2012
- 12,527
I don't think anybody is a "clueless fanboy " that responded to this thread.All those that responded in favor of ESS are those who use ESS.Why would you not suggest ESS to the OP when you use something that has worked for you for a long time.Why would you suggest a product that you have not used or you have had a bad experience with.
I have used ESET since version 2 and before there was a Smart Security product available.I have not had an infection in well over 15 years and I have only used 3 products,ESET,Kaspersky & Emsisoft.I am not going to change something that works and if asked I will suggest those products
I have used ESET since version 2 and before there was a Smart Security product available.I have not had an infection in well over 15 years and I have only used 3 products,ESET,Kaspersky & Emsisoft.I am not going to change something that works and if asked I will suggest those products
- Sep 9, 2013
- 925
Need suggestion for my Pc system ???
which is best product out of these two ?
1) Please describe your ''PC System'' (CPU, RAM, OS)
2) In what exactly are you interesting for? Detection? Performance? Price? Support?
3) How you are using the internet? Any experience?
Thank you
- Jan 15, 2014
- 242
Well, i tried BDIS 2014 and my pc DIED, it seemed an old Win98 in terms of speed...
Good detection, but it was unusable even on a mid-high hardware config.
Now I'm sticking with 2015 version and it's light as a feather, nice UI, nice features, seems that BD team has done a lot of work!
Programmed test: Bitdefender vs ESET => Tomorrow !
- Mar 8, 2013
- 49
Why blades? Because a forum member stated their experience with BD? They can express their opinion and experience and it can be completely valid. Not every configuration is the same and one user's experience can be different from another. Try not to get crazy over it. I also take issue with the fanboy comment and Eset. I know quite a few members here like umbra and cruelsister. I value their opinions and their ability to be honest about a product even if they use and like that product. I think you'll find that many people here can do the same. BD does have many issues so it's far from perfect. I have used it myself and I don't like it but that does not mean it won't do a good job of keeping your PC clean.
- May 17, 2014
- 179
thank you Manzai for the test in advance.Programmed test: Bitdefender vs ESET => Tomorrow !
waiting for it .
- May 17, 2014
- 179
hmm
1)CPU= 3.30GHz
RAM=4GB
OS= Window 7 64bit
2) I am interesting in
a) Detection
b) Zero-day Protection
c) Performance
3) Regular Usage
- Jan 31, 2014
- 903
Actually I would really like to try BitDefender Antivirus Plus 2015... so I have to uninstall my ESET Nod32 first... one turnoff for me though is the huge update signature files of BD... just hoping it is faster and really lighter this timeWell, i tried BDIS 2014 and my pc DIED, it seemed an old Win98 in terms of speed...
Good detection, but it was unusable even on a mid-high hardware config.
Now I'm sticking with 2015 version and it's light as a feather, nice UI, nice features, seems that BD team has done a lot of work!
- Jul 13, 2014
- 766
The two products have each an excellent engine. Now if you want lets say more features such as sandboxing capabilities and shredding etc, Bitdefender would be your choice. If you want on the otherside a product that can be heavily customized, such as being very agressive towards PUPs, scam sites and so on, Eset would be the best choice. Performance is not a problem, because Eset has always been light on the system and Bitdefender 2015 is very light also. Bitdefender really did a good job on this side. It is very difficult to choose between those two products.
- Mar 8, 2013
- 49
ifacedown, I tried BD 2015 on one of my test PC's at home. Actually, I use 2 custom built PC's for testing and another for everything else. Anyway, I tried BD 2015 for 5 days and I was shocked to see how they have simplified the GUI to the point where there are few choices. I know that means nothing if it does the job, but NOD32 is a complete polar opposite when it comes to configuration. NOD32 is so granular in it's options and BD has very few tweaking options. BD while light in general, and slightly lighter with 2015 than previous versions, adds significantly to my boot times. NOD32 just hits the Windows desktop about 15 seconds faster. Your mileage may vary.
Another thing I noticed ( I would love to know if any of you have had the same issue) is very heavy hard drive activity and some high CPU usage after I installed BD 2015. It defiantly was not my imagination. That would concern me if I was going to switch from NOD32 to BD. In the end I decided to stay with NOD32, especially since the combo of EAM and NOD32 works so well for me. Thanks Umbra Polaris for your great combo guides! Good luck with BD 2015, ifacedown. It does a good job but there are too many issues I can't get past with BD. Even if BD had no downside for me, it would make no sense to use it paired with Emsisoft. Especially since Emsisoft does as good or better a job than BD and without any of the negatives.
Littlebits
Retired Staff
- May 3, 2011
- 3,893
Neither one, there are far better options to use that are completely free, if you use good downloading habits then that is all you will need along with UAC. There is no given proof that any one product paid or free will offer better protection for every single user the same way.
Users of paid products get infected just as easily if they are careless.
Enjoy!!
Users of paid products get infected just as easily if they are careless.
Enjoy!!
- Sep 9, 2013
- 925
Ok, your system is strong so according performance both AV will be ok.
As about detection ESET wins by far ( better detection of PUP)
Zero Day : ESET (modified settings in firewall or hips)
In my opinion ESET would be a better choice (better detection of PUPs, No buggs, Performance, etc)
As about memory usage ESET wins again as it consumes about 90 - 100 MB while Bitdefender uses 100 - 200Mb (update, scanning, etc)
I hope i helped you
- Nov 15, 2012
- 1,765
According to me ESET will surely win in terms Protection,
Detection: Bitdefender do have a very great database but still ESET has great detection rate than Bitdefender, For confirmation check MalwareHub section,
ESET has a great detection rate as it uses Heuristics Engine, which is light & capable of detecting similar malware.
Zero-Day: Really in terms of Zero-Day Detection i guess both of them are mostly dependent on their signature, But according to me a AV should not be more dependent of signature. ESET have introduced some features which could decrease ESET's dependency on Signature, but untill now there are not much effective.
Lightness: There is no ways Bitdefender would ever defeat ESET in terms of Lightness.
If you are finding for a perfect AV solution, than i would suggest you to give a try to Kaspersky Internet Security 2015, Really Kaspersky is AV which is not dependent equally dependent on signatures & its module.
Whereas Really a Perfect AV in my opinion is Emsisoft Internet Security because its detection, Prevention, Zero-Day protection is awesome.
Emsisoft has best Best AV & best FW. (@Umbra Polaris would agree with me.) There is no way any BB could fight with Emsisoft BB. - Really i would love to know, on which Principles Emsisoft Anti-Malware & BB work.
Really Even Emsisoft is now a days known for maintaining a users privacy.
Overall Bitdefender could lead this battle but as always Bitdefender is too buggy which makes it loose almost all battle.
Detection: Bitdefender do have a very great database but still ESET has great detection rate than Bitdefender, For confirmation check MalwareHub section,
ESET has a great detection rate as it uses Heuristics Engine, which is light & capable of detecting similar malware.
Zero-Day: Really in terms of Zero-Day Detection i guess both of them are mostly dependent on their signature, But according to me a AV should not be more dependent of signature. ESET have introduced some features which could decrease ESET's dependency on Signature, but untill now there are not much effective.
Lightness: There is no ways Bitdefender would ever defeat ESET in terms of Lightness.
If you are finding for a perfect AV solution, than i would suggest you to give a try to Kaspersky Internet Security 2015, Really Kaspersky is AV which is not dependent equally dependent on signatures & its module.
Whereas Really a Perfect AV in my opinion is Emsisoft Internet Security because its detection, Prevention, Zero-Day protection is awesome.
Emsisoft has best Best AV & best FW. (@Umbra Polaris would agree with me.) There is no way any BB could fight with Emsisoft BB. - Really i would love to know, on which Principles Emsisoft Anti-Malware & BB work.
Really Even Emsisoft is now a days known for maintaining a users privacy.
Overall Bitdefender could lead this battle but as always Bitdefender is too buggy which makes it loose almost all battle.
- Jan 31, 2014
- 903
ifacedown, I tried BD 2015 on one of my test PC's at home. Actually, I use 2 custom built PC's for testing and another for everything else. Anyway, I tried BD 2015 for 5 days and I was shocked to see how they have simplified the GUI to the point where there are few choices. I know that means nothing if it does the job, but NOD32 is a complete polar opposite when it comes to configuration. NOD32 is so granular in it's options and BD has very few tweaking options. BD while light in general, and slightly lighter with 2015 than previous versions, adds significantly to my boot times. NOD32 just hits the Windows desktop about 15 seconds faster. Your mileage may vary.
Another thing I noticed ( I would love to know if any of you have had the same issue) is very heavy hard drive activity and some high CPU usage after I installed BD 2015. It defiantly was not my imagination. That would concern me if I was going to switch from NOD32 to BD. In the end I decided to stay with NOD32, especially since the combo of EAM and NOD32 works so well for me. Thanks Umbra Polaris for your great combo guides! Good luck with BD 2015, ifacedown. It does a good job but there are too many issues I can't get past with BD. Even if BD had no downside for me, it would make no sense to use it paired with Emsisoft. Especially since Emsisoft does as good or better a job than BD and without any of the negatives.
Thanks so much for all the input!
actually yesterday I did put my Drive C on Shadow Mode using Shadow Defender. I online-install BitDefender Antivirus PLus 2015 without first uninstalling ESET Nod32... and it did install without alarming me to first uninstall ESET!
The GUI is lighter than the former 2014. The product is lighter, overall. However, just like v.2014, there was much HardDisk operations and some CPU spikes... unlike ESET.
So, does ESET really uses heuristics for its signature? So that's why the update files are too small! And all loaded into memory! Wow!
Well I know installing BD on ShadowMode wasn't fair, because I noticed programs would run faster on a real environment and not on any virtualization. However, I would stick with ESET esp. that I have a low-end system. Thanks.
- Jan 31, 2014
- 903
ESET wins!
- Status
Similar threads
