Battle Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus VS ESET NOD32 Antivirus 9

Status
Not open for further replies.

kowalski215

Level 2
Mar 16, 2015
52
Hello everyone. I've always been using ESET. Now I just got a 180-day key from a Giveaway for Webroot Antivirus. I just installed it in order to give it a try. Well, performance is much more better than ESET (few MB compared to 120, kind of). What's your opinion about that?.
I do have a Surface pro 4, i5, 8GB RAM. I know it would bear ESET, but I'm actually intreseted in performance - it's still a tablet actually. Do you have some On-Demand scanners that may repair to the cloud-engine only? thanks in advance.

PS: My Surface is not ALWAYS connected to the internet... 90%..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rishi

ifacedown

Level 18
Verified
Jan 31, 2014
868
The highest level of Heuristics behavior blocker of Webroot will act like a whitelisting app, which ciuld help very much when offline.
 

aseu2k15

New Member
Nov 26, 2015
44
If your device not fully connected to internet, using cloud based anti virus will not give you maximum protection. Even webroot heuristics can help you when offline, the maximum protection when its connected to cloud databases server.
So, I would recommend you to use signature based AV for better offline protection.
ESET is one of the best AV at performance and signature/detection. You have 8GB RAM? Its more than enough to run ESET at maximum protection. IMO

But in the end, its depend to your need. Performance or Protection? :)

Cloud based on-demand scanner: zemana anti malware, herd protect etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bitbizket and Rishi

Soulbound

Moderator
Verified
Staff member
Jan 14, 2015
1,775
Performance wise, RAM usage is incorrect way to have it measured.
You need to look at CPU Usage, I/O etc.
ESET RAM is constantly at around give or take 150MB because signatures are stored there, while WEBROOT is mainly cloud based, so RAM usage is low.

However when full system scan is being done, ESET has traditionally lower CPU usage and I/O entries compared to Webroot, and I have extensively used both.

For your Surface, Windows Defender is more than enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rishi

jamescv7

Level 85
Verified
Trusted
Mar 15, 2011
13,088
Am I supposed to trust windows defender?

Why not? Windows Defender are better than those AV's which contains shady tactics on backgrounds, although one of their process tends to increase the Disk usage more often.

Webroot can be your good choice in terms of stability as the main components are purely light, but ESET is engineered to consume enough resources without sacrificing as become proven on majority of users.
 

kowalski215

Level 2
Mar 16, 2015
52
Why not? Windows Defender are better than those AV's which contains shady tactics on backgrounds, although one of their process tends to increase the Disk usage more often.
Too many issues with Windows Defender in the past actually .Anyway, i'll switch back to Eset , it seems To be more reliable.Downloaded EEK as well
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: omidomi and Rishi

Soulbound

Moderator
Verified
Staff member
Jan 14, 2015
1,775
users will only get issues in terms of infections if they do not use safe browsing methods etc. WD is perfectly fine on its own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Behold Eck

Hangtooth

Level 5
Dec 5, 2015
202
I really like how light Webroot is, it seemed even lighter than Eset Antivirus alone. I really like Eset as a product though and never had a problem with the way it worked, it would occasionally block a website I didn't agree with, but that was rare.

Webroot on the other hand proved too intrusive (for me, your mileage may vary) with too many false positives on both files and entire website domains blocked. These weaknesses only showed up while I was tweaking, poking, prodding and testing things on a fresh Windows 10 upgrade with other tools, so I'd still suggest it as a set and forget AV. Nothing it flagged with a FP was crucial, but the web shield was truly annoying and seemed totally arbitrary in what sites it would block. You can turn it off or even just uncheck the box for blocking malicious websites, that seemed to help a lot.

If you have a free license for 180 days, that should give you ample time to give Webroot a spin and see if it works for you. It might work really well for a tablet and seem even speedier than ESET.
 

bitbizket

Level 3
Jul 26, 2011
250
Why not? Windows Defender are better than those AV's which contains shady tactics on backgrounds, although one of their process tends to increase the Disk usage more often.

Webroot can be your good choice in terms of stability as the main components are purely light, but ESET is engineered to consume enough resources without sacrificing as become proven on majority of users.

I couldn't agree more. Missed the old Webroot SecureAnywhere and Malware Defender the best HIPS ever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top