Battle ESET Smart Security 9 VS Kaspersky Internet Security 2016?

[Jrs30]

Which one is the best ?
better detection
Less false positives
Worth less in the system

I bought a license for ESET Smart Security 9, apparently Antivirus is excellent, very saw videos of comparisons with other antivirus, and it pleased me a lot, both in the interface and usability!
I was in doubt of which pay a license, get me out of this doubt, what do you think best?
Thank you!
I hope you understand my question!
I used Google Translate, I'm from Brazil.
Thank you again!

 

[safe1st]

Kaspersky for better detection and I think also less false positive

but you said "I bought a license for ESET Smart Security 9" so just use it then. Eset is good too, very light on system

 

[Alkajak]

Out of the box: Kaspersky

Tweaked: ESET and then some

 

[Venustus]

Kaspersky runs "lighter" for me these days with excellent protection>>needs some tweaking"

 

[jerzy601]

personally I prefer Eset is lightweight and has a good detection rate, but for me and my equipment is Kaspersky is a little heavy, but it depends on who has what equipment and what is expected from security software.

 

[hjlbx]

Laptop - ESET
Desktop (with sufficient CPU\RAM) - Kaspersky

Kaspersky needs full power - so that means laptop would need to be plugged-in most of the time - which isn't practical for a laptop.

Also, Kaspersky adds significantly to system reboot - laptop or desktop.

 

[shukla44]

My vote: Kaspersky
For beginners & for specialists, good for both.

But you have already bought ESET license. I am using ESET on my netbook. I know it is good too. I am happy with ESET, light & didn't have any infection or problems until now.

It all depends on how you use it. If you are a common user with safe browsing & computing habits then any antivirus would do.

 

[cutting_edgetech]

This one was an easy vote for me. I hate Kaspersky Firewall so I voted Eset. I had to allow everything with Kaspersky, or be prompted to death for the same application. I only wanted Kaspersky to prompt me for any application requesting outbound internet access which there was no rule for, but Kaspersky by default allows almost all outbound internet access. It took me forever to find the option in Kaspersky to change it so that the Firewall prompted me for outbound request for all applications. When I changed it to prompt me for any outbound request which there was no rule for Kaspersky promtped me for Firefox multiple times every time I opened my browser, and would continue to prompt me after I created a rule for Firefox. The same thing happened with many other applications. Eset's firewall usability is much better than Kaspersky, and give the user better control. Kaspersky AV is a different story. I actually like the AV so I will end it on positive note.

2/5/16 @ 6:10 am

 

[ijence]

My vote: Kaspersky Internet Security 2016.
I tried both of them and decided to buy KIS two weeks ago.
I have laptop (i7-4750HQ, 16GB RAM, SSD) and it is not heavy at all

 

[SloppyMcFloppy]

I vote Kaspersky Internet Security 2016 because that is what I'm currently using alongside with MBAM Premium and for mother Russia!

@ijence Is that a gaming laptop?

 

[ijence]

I vote Kaspersky Internet Security 2016 because that is what I'm currently using alongside with MBAM Premium and for mother Russia!

@ijence Is that a gaming laptop?

Clevo W740SU - definitely not a gaming laptop, only integrated GPU

 

[Noxx]

Kaspersky if you have the computer resources for it. Otherwise, ESET.

 

[Stas]

I vote Kaspersky Internet Security 2016 because that is what I'm currently using alongside with MBAM Premium and for mother Russia!

Kaspersky Internet Security alongside with MBAM Premium must be heavy on resources

 

[TheMalwareMaster]

Considering you bought an ESET licence, keep it. One thing I like about it is that I think is one of the best at detecting PUPs (of corse, you have to enable the option when you download it)

 

[SloppyMcFloppy]

Kaspersky Internet Security alongside with MBAM Premium must be heavy on resources

But there is no major slow down at all, and both suites consume 2.3GB/32GB RAM while is idle on desktop.

 

[Nightwalker]

This one was an easy vote for me. I hate Kaspersky Firewall so I voted Eset. I had to allow everything with Kaspersky, or be prompted to death for the same application. I only wanted Kaspersky to prompt me for any application requesting outbound internet access which there was no rule for, but Kaspersky by default allows almost all outbound internet access. It took me forever to find the option in Kaspersky to change it so that the Firewall prompted me for outbound request for all applications. When I changed it to prompt me for any outbound request which there was no rule for Kaspersky promtped me for Firefox multiple times every time I opened my browser, and would continue to prompt me after I created a rule for Firefox. The same thing happened with many other applications. Eset's firewall usability is much better than Kaspersky, and give the user better control. Kaspersky AV is a different story. I actually like the AV so I will end it on positive note.

2/5/16 @ 6:10 am

What was the last version of Kaspersky that did you tried?

 

[cutting_edgetech]

What was the last version of Kaspersky that did you tried?

It was about 6 weeks ago that I tired using Kaspersky Internet Security. It was the latest version available then.

 

[cutting_edgetech]

Are we allowed to talk about youtube malware test videos that are related to the thread topic on this forum? Can we link to test conducted by testers like cruelsister? I think she is a talented tester. I'm use to Wilders forum rules.

 

[safe1st]

Are we allowed to talk about youtube malware test videos that are related to the thread topic on this forum? Can we link to test conducted by testers like cruelsister? I think she is a talented tester. I'm use to Wilders forum rules.

@cruelsister is in this forum. Yes shes talented tester

 

[cruelsister]

If I'm allowed to intrude, I was contacted by Kaspersky earlier today and they seem to find the issue demonstrated in the video to be significant enough to make some changes (thank God). It took Qihoo about 7 days to recode, so I guess we will see how quick K is...