Battle On-Demand Scanner - Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Free or Emsisoft Emergency Kit?

[petersaints]

I want to have a main go-to on-demand anti-malware scanner (a second opinion scanner if you prefer). I do know that I can just run both (one after the other) but I wanted to know what is your opinion regarding which one does a better job in most cases.

 

[FrFc1908]

In my honoust opinion it is best to not put all your eggs into one basket , meaning that two or three on demand scanners can catch more than one does. that being said : malwarebytes , Emsisoft emergency kit and zemana anti malware free are the three best to have , what one of them does not detect the other two will

 

[Tyrizian]

In my honoust opinion it is best to not put all your eggs into one basket , meaning that two or three on demand scanners can catch more than one does. that being said : malwarebytes , Emsisoft emergency kit and zemana anti malware free are the three best to have , what one of them does not detect the other two will

I completely agree with this.

 

[Exterminator]

Emsisoft Emergency Kit contains a collection of programs that can be used without installing software and is also portable and can be used on a USB.
Although no real time protection it will scan and clean an infected PC.

Malwarebytes Antimalware does provide real time protection on the premium (paid) version but the free version works well as an on demand scanner.
Since they use different methods of detection it would be more advisable to use both especially when EEK does not require installation as MBAM does.

Since EEK contains a command line scanner,uses a dual engine scanner (their own & Bitdefender's) and does not require software installation I would choose EEK for the sake of the poll

However I personally use both,except on my PC's that I use Emsisoft Internet Security,along with Zemana Antimalware.On those PC's that I use EIS I use MBAM & ZAM as my only on demand scanners

 

[Overkill]

Both are good scanners, but I use mbam more than EEK simply because mbam is faster atleast on my end

 

[DJ Panda]

I would use both scanners alongside an AV like Avast or Windows Defender.

 

[TheBlue262]

I would use Malwarebytes rather than Enisoft if I had to choose between them, but I recommend you try out Zemana Anti-Malware.

 

[OokamiCreed]

I can't vote for one over the other for the simple fact that you can't really have too many on demand scanners. With that said, there is also no need to over do it (having both is not too much in this case). EEK has an advantage of two engines. Emsisoft and Bitdefender. Naturally it MAY detect more files/registries, etc as malicious however it also has a higher false positive rate - meaning files that are not malicious but are detected as such (I am basing this on personal experience - both on my personal computer that uses many not typically used software and on novice users PC that mostly use trusted and tested software). Emsisoft Emergency Kit does not have the same capabilities as Malwarebytes (personal opinion. For free, I also believe it is more experienced (and more focused on) removal of active threats which is the goal).

Spoiler: extra details - not really necessary to know for your request

This of course is it's ability to be installed and used on a previously infected computer. Malwarebytes (if you accept the use of a free trial - this is not available on free version) can prevent termination of it's processes, and its cleaning up with something called Chameleon. This is not available for free version according to the free vs paid chart found here: What's the difference between the M...

I find Malwarebytes is more accurate (finds threats with less or fewer false positives than Emsisoft) and more efficient removal especially if you use the premium version (which is not being compared as you are looking for free - just being through). For that reason alone, I recommend Malwarebytes Free over Emsisoft Emergency Kit if you MUST have one over the other. I would consider using both. They work well together.

Other benefits for Emsisoft: Portable (USB friendly unlike Malwarebytes), has more tools (for both novice and experienced users for free without any extra download), more engines can sometimes means more threats found - both Emsisoft and Bitdefender are very capable. Malwarebytes is focused on the newest threats rather than older ones and new - this can be both a disadvantage and advantage for Emsisoft. For me, the scanning speed for full USB/HDD/SSD is faster.

Other benefits for Malwarebytes: Emsisoft believe in prevention (preventing threats from entering the system rather than cleaning up the aftermath) which can be a reason to believe they are not as focused as others with removal of active (or inactive, remnants of (as in files that pose no threat to the system unless executed - some are simply not executable)) threats as Malwarebytes. Malwarebytes is significantly smaller in size compared to Emsisoft Emergency Kit - shouldn't matter with good download speed and having no data limit - just something to keep in mind. Malwarebytes will probably have definitions and more successful at removal for very new threats.

Both have custom scan on free version. Malwarebytes Hyper scan (looks in active memory, directories, etc for active threats) with paid only - keep in mind you can achieve the same using custom scan. EEK has quick (active threats and it's traces) and Malware Scan (typical places that malware hides). Custom can be used for full scans. Use Direct Disk Access to scan for rootkits only, not entire drives - I've had a crash using this for what it is not intended for.

Personal recommendation from me is to use both if you feel your system is infected or as a simple check up. They won't bother each other (unfortunately quarantined files that are not encrypted and such by another product can be detected by another product - I haven't had this issue because I reinstall or restore a full backup to ensure a real infection (if verified) isn't persistent. Maybe someone here knows if both or one encrypts/hides a file so it is rendered useless and doesn't throw off another product).

 

[hjlbx]

Using EEK and Zemana is kind of pointless due to the Bitdefender overlap.

With that being said, an alternative strategy is to install Malwarebytes on the system and use a portable scanner installed on a USB.

Whatever you do use, you will eventually learn\realize that multiple AV scans on your system are pointless...

 

[_CyberGhosT_]

Easy one for me, EEK all the way
Its fast, very effective, and I have used it in real situations a few times on infected systems within my extended family
and it came through "every" time.

 

[Vipersd]

Both on my PC.

EEK is also great because of it's portability, you can use it all around from flash drive.

 

[CMLew]

I prefer EEK over MBAM Free due to EEK's portability. All my OD scanners are portable in my thumbrive. Rarely I'll use OD scanner on my own PC but mostly on my friends/work laptop.

Performance wise, both are decent.

 

[ravi prakash saini]

I cannot vote until the third option is included that is "do you use both"

 

[Stas]

If i had time to do only one scan then i'd pick EEK because i believe it will find more threats, if no time limit then use both, and if no time limit + have online access then Zemana AM portable & MBAM Free because Zemana find more threats & MBAM good at PUP&PUM.

 

[FrankS]

Why decide between EEK and MBAM? Both have no realtime-protection (MBAM on free-mode). You can use EEK, MBAM, Zemana, Microsoft Safety Scanner (just examples, which I'm regularly using) and any Realtime-Antivirus for parallel system-scanning.

More Engines (and more signature databases) = More/better detection ratio.
But be careful. Not every detection is real malware. If you're using more scan-engines, the false positive ratio will be higher automatically. Don't delete every detection without checking carefully.

 

[Deleted member 178]

My vote will go to EEK because it is portable

But i mostly use HitmanPro

 

[Soulbound]

Poll modified:
Others/combination (please state which and why) <-- was added


I personally use MBAM. EEK can sometimes be a bit aggressive for my taste, personal choice tho.

Both good in its own way. Use both for a piece of mind.

 

[_CyberGhosT_]

Why decide between EEK and MBAM? Both have no realtime-protection

Thats the whole idea behind "On Demand" we are discussing scanners to use as a second opinion that are "Not" run in realtime, IE for emergencies or Second Opinion only.
PeAcE

 

[_CyberGhosT_]

I agree on this front too Umbra The portable nature of EEK makes it a good choice to pop in from a thumb and so rescue style scans.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

I use zemana portable first and malwarebytes portable only if PUPs still persist.

I think zemana deepscan can detect most of the things but some chibese PUPs are usually missed so it's time for mbam