Battle Is BitDefender IS 2015/2016 really lighter than ESET SS 8?

[ifacedown]

AV-Comparatives has rated Bitdefender 2015 as one of the lightest product, best in performance AV suite for 2014. Even this year, Bitdefender ranks there as a lot lighter than ESET SS 8.

What do you think? In my low-end system, at installation and after a week of usage, ESET is still lighter than Bitdefender. What exactly is Photon technology?

 

[jerzy601]

by year I have used ESET was very happy with him, I felt it from the system but I ran out and I had to install the license Avire Free.
Bitdefender also had for some time but it did not fit me slowed down my surfing so I uninstalled it.
My vote goes to Eset.

 

[bitbizket]

Both are light but impact on performance will depends on each systen environment and OS used. Though i prefered ESET as my first choice, i think Bitdefender provides a better response of all the applications that i used and the Photon technology does works.

Currently downgraded to ESET AV since Smart Security slows down browsing and intermitent VPN connectivity. ESET SS does not gives me any problem while i'm on Win 7 as it did on a Win 8.1 machine.

ESET is more stable and less buggy than Bitdefender and provide a better real-world protection if configured properly, besides ESET is more flexible when used in multi-layered security setup, like Kaspersky... Bitdefender is more prone to conflicts.

I vote Bitdefender for it lightness. both have great detection.

 

[kev216]

I tried them both, but when you work on a good computer, they both have the same performance. If you have a weaker computer, then I personnaly would choose ESET over Bitdefender. My older computer became slot after installing BD, but it was more usable when Eset was present.

 

[Tony Cole]

ESET is far better, tried BTS 2016, no settings (custom) stay, plus custom firewall settings on reboot disappear. Stick to ESET, far more stable and better protection.

 

[kiric96]

My vote goes for ESET, light and effective.


ESET actually does this until you manually disable such task, you get better performance as well.

on startup scan is not the same as on boot scan... what i mean is that pc is checked before or while windows is booting not after it fully started...

 

[darko999]

on startup scan is not the same as on boot scan... what i mean is that pc is checked before or while windows is booting not after it fully started...

Yes it also scan boot sectors as soon as ESET modules loads up, it affects performance as well; my desktop shows up faster if I have it disabled since before it loads it is already working. "During system start" which is what it says on settings it's different from after system starts. The point it's the same, startup performance can be increased in both cases if such task is disabled.

 

[bitbizket]

I guess you u did see a black screen delay with ESET too but shorter time than Bitdefender.

 

[kiric96]

Yes it also scan boot sectors as soon as ESET modules loads up, it affects performance as well; my desktop shows up faster if I have it disabled since before it loads it is already working. "During system start" which is what it says on settings it's different from after system starts. The point it's the same, startup performance can be increased in both cases if such task is disabled.

No, both concepts are different, eset scan your pc once it is full loaded, bitdefender does this "comprobation" while system boot, that is why you see a major delay with this AV, if you want to know more, the driver used is "bdelam.sys" (it will cause a headache when corrupted) xD

eset uses their whole engine instead of a driver...

 

[XhenEd]

I guess you u did see a black screen delay with ESET too but shorter time than Bitdefender.

I think the black screen delay is because of Windows 10. I'm using EIS 10, and the black screen delay is there. Even after I "reset" Windows 10 (so no AV except Windows Defender), there was still the black screen delay.

 

[darko999]

No, both concepts are different, eset scan your pc once it is full loaded, bitdefender does this "comprobation" while system boot, that is why you see a major delay with this AV, if you want to know more, the driver used is "bdelam.sys" (it will cause a headache when corrupted) xD

eset uses their whole engine instead of a driver...

May be different but effect it's the same, better performance in both cases; but ESET is by default lighter than BIS so my vote goes there.

 

[bitbizket]

I think the black screen delay is because of Windows 10. I'm using EIS 10, and the black screen delay is there. Even after I "reset" Windows 10 (so no AV except Windows Defender), there was still the black screen delay.

Nope i'm on Wimdows 8.1 but still Smart Security doesn't gells well on my current windows. I've no intention to upgrade to Windows 10 nothing beneficial at my end.

Thanks.

 

[kiric96]

May be different but effect it's the same, better performance in both cases; but ESET is by default lighter than BIS so my vote goes there.

wont change your mind dude, but am telling you that you have to consider how a program works to measure their lightness, point here is that they do almost the same stuff but in different ways and manners... eset will be always lighter than any AV as the way they built their engine is better than others (eg. whole bitdefender engine is 190mb and eset one is 60-80) as i said before you have to consider too many factors... as on boot, a driver scan is much better than a startup scan.

as a matter of fact eset when is unable to delete something it flags the file to be deleted on next reboot, the problem here is if for some reason eset service is disabled (which is pretty easy to do) then you will be in trouble, with bitdefender this is not a problem because on next reboot all the boot files will be analyzed and disinfected if necessary or deleted even if the main service was corrupted... see the point? am not saying that eset or bitdefender is the best, am just trying to point out the different ways they work... and well to do this bitdefender may require some resources and that why you see some delay

 

[darko999]

wont change your mind dude, but am telling you that you have to consider how a program works to measure their lightness, point here is that they do almost the same stuff but in different ways and manners... eset will be always lighter than any AV as the way they built their engine is better than others (eg. whole bitdefender engine is 190mb and eset one is 60-80) as i said before you have to consider too many factors... as on boot, a driver scan is much better than a startup scan.

as a matter of fact eset when is unable to delete something it flags the file to be deleted on next reboot, the problem here is if for some reason eset service is disabled (which is pretty easy to do) then you will be in trouble, with bitdefender this is not a problem because on next reboot all the boot files will be analyzed and disinfected if necessary or deleted even if the main service was corrupted... see the point? am not saying that eset or bitdefender is the best, am just trying to point out the different ways they work... and well to do this bitdefender may require some resources and that why you see some delay

In the past it was easy to kill ESET core service, in the present it is different story. However, I only use ESETAV for Signature and heuristics and some of their HIPS features, but I do use ComodoFW + HIPS only so there is no room for such "Killing ESET service's in my case". And yes, it is still lighter than BIS on my machine.
PD: If I had to pick between ESET AV only "or BIS then I'll consider losing some performance.

 

[kiric96]

In the past it was easy to kill ESET core service, in the present it is different story. However, I only use ESETAV for Signature and heuristics and some of their HIPS features, but I do use ComodoFW + HIPS only so there is no room for such "Killing ESET service's in my case". And yes, it is still lighter than BIS on my machine.
PD: If I had to pick between ESET AV only "or BIS then I'll consider losing some performance.

heuristics? eset is jut regular as others with it... really i havent see too much of their heuristics in action... (been user around 5 years) and well by killing i didnt mean to "kil" via taskmanager or something related... for example you may place this code in your registry:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Image File Execution Options\egui.exe]

    "Debugger" = "ntsd -d"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Image File Execution Options\ekrn.exe]

    "Debugger" = "ntsd -d"

then restart your pc, and you would see, what happens here is that we set debugger mode for eset gui and service and believe me no AV will run under this setting, is not a "hack" it is the way it is supposed to be... old viruses uses this technique to disable real time protection and still works.... you can do the same for bitdefender... but the difference is that despite bitdefender service is unable to start the driver will delete the malware on boot and after a quick repair you are done with eset is another story... got the point? and well glad to see that you take security as a serious matter but am talking in general...

 

[darko999]

heuristics? eset is jut regular as others with it... really i havent see too much of their heuristics in action... (been user around 5 years) and well by killing i didnt mean to "kil" via taskmanager or something related... for example you may place this code in your registry:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Image File Execution Options\egui.exe]

    "Debugger" = "ntsd -d"

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Image File Execution Options\ekrn.exe]

    "Debugger" = "ntsd -d"

then restart your pc, and you would see, what happens here is that we set debugger mode for eset gui and service and believe me no AV will run under this setting, is not a "hack" it is the way it is supposed to be... old viruses uses this technique to disable real time protection and still works.... you can do the same for bitdefender... but the difference is that despite bitdefender service is unable to start the driver will delete the malware on boot and after a quick repair you are done with eset is another story... got the point? and well glad to see that you take security as a serious matter but am talking in general...

Did you even read what I typed down lol, that's not a possible scenario on my machine.
And yes, ESET heuristics detects a lot of malware outhere that's why with a low update cycle compared to the rest ESET still gets better than average detection.

 

[kiric96]

Did you even read what I typed down lol, that's not a possible scenario on my machine.
And yes, ESET heuristics detects a lot of malware outhere that's why with a low update cycle compared to the rest ESET still gets better than average detection.

Did you read my last line??? I said i talked in general... Do you use comodo sandbox by the way??? Well my point was that it is still possible to disable an AV via reg.

Eset use signatures heuristics, beyond that nothing else...

 

[darko999]

Did you read my last line??? I said i talked in general... Do you use comodo sandbox by the way??? Well my point was that it is still possible to disable an AV via reg.

Eset use signatures heuristics, beyond that nothing else...

And so? they work like a charm.


In addition to comparing potential malware against known virus signatures, all ESET products use heuristics to detect viruses, trojans and other threats. The use of heuristics is a technique that implements a set of guidelines or rules in order to problem-solve efficiently. In an antivirus context, heuristics are a set of rules used to detect malicious program behavior without needing to uniquely identify the specific threat, as is required by classic signature-based detection. The primary advantage of the heuristic-based model is not only its ability to detect variants or modified forms of existing malicious programs, but also new previously-unknown malicious programs. ESET Smart Security and ESET NOD32 Antivirus use heuristics to detect both known and unknown threats and malware. Two forms of heuristics are used, passive and active.

Passive heuristics
Passive heuristics analyze a potential threat as it is scanned, tracing through the instructions in the program before passing the code to the processor for execution. Passive heuristics look for patterns, routines or program calls that indicate malicious behavior. Though an important tool, passive heuristics alone are only part of the solution, as there is no single action that a malicious program can perform that is not also allowed in a legitimate program. This is why the simultaneous use of active heuristics is important.

Active heuristics
The active heuristic technology used by ESET products creates a virtual computer within the scanning engine that allows the scanner to observe what the program might do if allowed to run on a real computer. This can reveal potentially malicious activities that other detection techniques would not identify.

 

[Durden]

bitdefender is really an interesting product . On my work laptop I don't notice it there, I've even tweaked it for a higher level of protection . and -knock on wood- haven't seen any bugs at all .
version 2016 is much lighter than it's predecessor .
ESET, though I've been a fan of the product since the early version 3
though , I've been wondering , did anyone made a full in-depth review of BD 2016 ? and another Qs , does anybody have an idea about 2016's version's firewall (effectiveness , and stock settings) ?

 

[jamescv7]

@E7_Durden : In case you missed it, here is the recent review for Bitdefender IS 2016 . You may check those post especially to @hjlbx.

 

[hjlbx]

did anyone made a full in-depth review of BD 2016 ? and another Qs , does anybody have an idea about 2016's version's firewall (effectiveness , and stock settings) ?

Bitdefender uses Windows Firewall and adds some policies.

Bitdefender firewall maximum settings:

Network type - Public
Generic - ON (Generic means it will apply current firewall profile to any newly encountered network)
Under Generic Rules - set Incoming Remote Desktop - Deny
Set Intrusion Detection System to Aggressive
Set Active Threat Control to Aggressive

NOTE: IDS and ATC are inter-dependent. So do not disable one as it will affect the other protection.

In Auto Pilot mode, on clean system, Bitdefender will create allow rules for all softs. If malicious activity is detected, it will auto-block network access.

In Paranoid mode, you will get prompt for network access. You can allow or deny. (For Paranoid mode to work properly, you must disable Profiles under Tools. If properly disabled, it will show "Activate Now (blue)" on main user interface. If it is set to (black) Standard, Work, etc, then it is not disabled.).

Bitdefender firewall adds basic user-interface to Windows Firewall.

Intrustion Detection System is good at blocking network access, even if you mess up your settings.

For best results, use Auto Pilot mode with maximum settings.

Suggested supplement for Bitdefender: Sandboxie and NoVirusThanks Exe Radar Pro.

Dependent upon OS, one might have issues between Bitdefender and Firefox; it is unclear whether the issues are due to Bitdefender, Firefox or both. Bitdefender works best with Internet Explorer.