- Jul 27, 2015
- 5,459
Really!? SAFE, the latest stable version 17.7?
I already know how SAFEs stable version works with it's self-protection, but I'm still very curious.
Norton vs G DATA vs kaspersky vs 360ts vs F-Secure
- Thread starter alv222
- Start date
I already know how SAFEs stable version works with it's self-protection, but I'm still very curious.
- Sep 10, 2015
- 901
Yes, the last version I used was 17.7.
I've trialed all of them and what i've found is that:
G Data is heavy but has some useful functions like encryption. F-Secure got a horrible UI but really light, can't even notice it's there and fast scans. Kaspersky is kind of heavy and has a nice UI, but really slow scans. Norton, lightweight, nice UI and has a fast VPN but it takes time for their "Download Insight" to verify downloads, fast scans. 360TS very nice customizable UI, avira and bitdefender engine, has some kind of HIPS but their own engines are weak. I also tried bitdefender, it was light but their updates are really slow, their UI is decent and doesn't have many features.
G Data is heavy but has some useful functions like encryption. F-Secure got a horrible UI but really light, can't even notice it's there and fast scans. Kaspersky is kind of heavy and has a nice UI, but really slow scans. Norton, lightweight, nice UI and has a fast VPN but it takes time for their "Download Insight" to verify downloads, fast scans. 360TS very nice customizable UI, avira and bitdefender engine, has some kind of HIPS but their own engines are weak. I also tried bitdefender, it was light but their updates are really slow, their UI is decent and doesn't have many features.
- Jul 27, 2015
- 5,459
Interesting as when I test that, the self-protection works as it should.
Last edited:
- Jul 14, 2015
- 733
F-secure Safe , light on all of are devices ... grabbed a free 1-year license in GiveAway topic....
Now one week running on computer and its working very smooth
Now one week running on computer and its working very smooth
Last edited:
- Jul 28, 2016
- 950
you are right about the nags in the free version of 360 and ads in the gui , but you can but licenses cheap at eybay or block "promoutil.exe" with your firewall. system optimization is NOT questionable , it is actually good and really improve your system speed. once the scan finishes , you can view the outcome , before making the tweaks and deselect the stuff you do not want to change. the driver updater is also good in the premium version! you can do a backup first , before you do update your drivers before updating. I never had any problems with it!
out of these I would pick 360ts because of its lightness and its ok protection. gdata was very heavy when I tried it out last in 2014. kaspersky is very good out of the box , but it still runs heavy on browsing the web and that annoying rootkit scan that runs automatically once a week. fsecure is way to expensive for what it offers and really slows webbrowsing and you can definately feel its pressence on the system.
Last edited:
kaspersky is heavy even without those scans and f-secure is not heavy, you could take a year free from the giveaway section
- Jul 28, 2016
- 950
I can get an fsecure rebrand free from my isp (kpnveilig also @ v17.7) and I do not like it all , because of its noticeable pressence , drag on webbrowsing and godawefull gui....had it on my system for half a day , and then got fed up with it....
- Jul 28, 2016
- 950
you mean fsecure? I did not pay attention too the ammount of ram it uses and its processes , I just noticed that my laptop did not run as smooth as it does with 360ts or eset. fsecures webfilter really did slow down chrome and brave.
Last edited:
- Sep 10, 2015
- 901
F-Secure became really light and unnoticeable on perfomance since they switched to Avira SDK, their web filter classifies most of my country websites as phishing/malware also some websites in Spanish are missidentied. The good side is that they don't mess with SSL connections downgrading them to SSL 1.2 because the MITM module doesn't supports modern TLS 1.3.
I just tried on 17.7. You can kill some of the processes but they aren't critical, they're the ones that tell Windows Security that protection is active and deliver notifications to you. There is an ULAV protected process that cannot be killed.
When the killable processes are killed you lose notifications, but deny behavior still works.
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,781
Excellent testing, as usual.
- May 26, 2014
- 1,339
Self-protection is overrated anyway, if malware has executed and got admin rights, the machine is already doomed.
For a family machine I would go with its F-Secure with its set it it and forget it attributes along with very good protection , for absolutely maximum protection I would say a tweaked Kaspersky beats any other product for protection.
- Jan 27, 2019
- 103
F-Secure is one of the best and easiest to use AVs around. No frills or bloat, and your modem/router firewall plus Windows firewall will give you plenty of protection from attackers.
I've tested most of the AVs over the years, and F-Secure has never given me any problems, which I can't say for programs like Norton, Bitdefender and Kaspersky. Trend Micro has good protection, but I have always found it heavy on both my machines.
Use the Internet sensibly, and F-Secure is all you need.
Against external attacks most consumer firewalls aren't very protective and generally are just simple nat but they will do act as a basic low end lock on the front door from inbound.
Also, WFW isn't going to protect systems from lateral movement across a network/workgroup/subnet. For that you need L7 rules with protocol awareness. I don't think a lot of AV suites offer a true third party firewall that isn't a boosted WFW.. What remains? GData, Norton, ZoneAlarm, Comodo, Panda, ESET.. Do Kaspersky, Bit Defender, AVIRA, and Bullguard still have stand alone firewalls not part of WF?
I don't use suites without a tweakable firewall in that isn't based off WF.
- Jan 27, 2019
- 103
Afaik, Kaspersky and Bitdefender have stand alone firewalls. I believe Bullguard tweaks the Windows firewall. Not sure about Avira.
In regards to NAT firewalls, they can be tweaked for maximum protection too, so I reckon F-Secure is still a good option.
1- don't mistake Windows Firewall and Windows Filtering Platform (WFP).
2- Windows Firewall and all 3rd party vendors implementing a Firewall relies on WFP, then some add some features to tighten the filtering.
3- Some vendors/developers just use and "improve" Windows Firewall (basically making a more usable GUI for it and adding more rules). The problem is some don't advertise it misleading the users to believe it is a full-fledge homemade firewall.
2- Windows Firewall and all 3rd party vendors implementing a Firewall relies on WFP, then some add some features to tighten the filtering.
3- Some vendors/developers just use and "improve" Windows Firewall (basically making a more usable GUI for it and adding more rules). The problem is some don't advertise it misleading the users to believe it is a full-fledge homemade firewall.
- Apr 5, 2014
- 6,001
F-Secure for sure!
G-Data is good , but it Use bug defender engine & it caused this software have more Fps & more heavier
360ts is Chinese junk ware I do't suggested it.
Norton is good one , but in level of Privacy I can't trust them.
Kaspersky is good choice also but some people say they do spying...
G-Data is good , but it Use bug defender engine & it caused this software have more Fps & more heavier
360ts is Chinese junk ware I do't suggested it.
Norton is good one , but in level of Privacy I can't trust them.
Kaspersky is good choice also but some people say they do spying...
Similar threads
