Battle Which is better, Kaspersky vs ESET at Extreme Settings?

[Xeno1234]

I'm a Kaspersky user after I recently was infected by Malware. I switched to it, and immediately it removed the threat.
I've seen some discussion with Kaspersky VS ESET, and I wonder, which is better at Extreme Settings. ESET has like a aggressive filter, which I dont think Kaspersky has, it just has Deeper Heuristics. But Kaspersky is the king of Behavioral Detection, with Sys Watcher, Opentip, and also a very good scanner to pair with it. So, which is better? I've made posts asking about Kaspersky, and this is just curiosity, I'm probably not gonna switch if ESET is better.

 

[CyberDevil]

I really like Eset, but even the very expensive Smart Security version is going to be a bit weaker than Kaspersky in my opinion. But, you have to understand that we are talking about fractions of a percent on huge sets of malware. In an average case these products will be roughly equal. You can get infected with any antivirus, so when choosing from the top ones, it usually makes sense to focus on usability, existence of the necessary settings, availability of the needed additional services (if you need them), legal dislocation and privacy, etc.

 

[NewbyUser]

Per this thread; Product Review - ESET Internet Security vs KASPERSKY Standard

Conclusions:

Both antiviruses are very efficient and have protected the system well.
ESET puts everything on the analysis and its large database. It knows how to catch malware in case of attacks but it needs a little more behavioral protection.

Kaspersky relies on behavioral protection and the cloud. It saved the machine from 2 attacks (just like Eset) with its database which is also consequent.
There are no winners or losers, it's a draw.

 

[Xeno1234]

I really like Eset, but even the very expensive Smart Security version is going to be a bit weaker than Kaspersky in my opinion. But, you have to understand that we are talking about fractions of a percent on huge sets of malware. In an average case these products will be roughly equal. You can get infected with any antivirus, so when choosing from the top ones, it usually makes sense to focus on usability, existence of the necessary settings, availability of the needed additional services (if you need them), legal dislocation and privacy, etc.

I think Kaspersky's behavioral detection is just crazy good. I also heard that its detection on the home versions is the same as the endpoint versions, which is cool to hear aswell.

 

[simmerskool]

There are no winners or losers, it's a draw.

...but ESET will probably "feel" lighter although that may vary from computer to computer.

 

[Sorrento]

I really dislike the latest Kaspersky UI with a vengeance - NOD32 was the first AV I paid for when I was just a lad, so I've always had a soft spot for ESET which its why its on this my main PC - ESET one of my favourite AV/AM's - The phrase ESET is weak is heard quite a bit on here, I feel its anything but weak?

 

[Kongo]

Protection wise tweaked Kaspersky will probably be better and more automated. In general I still prefer ESET as it's a bit lighter and very stable

 

[micasayyo]

Kaspersky maybe better but, I use Eset

 

[ForgottenSeer 100397]

Kaspersky is superior in both default and extreme settings. All of its protection components work effectively. Kaspersky's System Watcher outperforms other behavior blockers, which are mostly semi-HIPS or average.

 

[Xeno1234]

Kaspersky is superior in both default and extreme settings. All of its protection components work effectively. Kaspersky's System Watcher outperforms other behavior blockers, which are mostly semi-HIPS or average.

Yeah System Watcher goes crazy. I wonder if it detected fractueiser, im curious since not alot of other AV's got it.

 

[likeastar20]

Kaspersky is slightly better in terms of protection, simply because of the behaviour blocker

 

[Trident]

Kaspersky is slightly better in terms of protection, simply because of the behaviour blocker

The kaspersky anti-malware engine is more capable than Eset’s engine as well and also, Kaspersky has the Intrusion Detection/Application Control which is easier to use and smarter than Eset’s old fashioned HIPS. Certain components in Eset, such as the LiveGuard emulation turned out to have been developed to a very low, subpar standard, for example it is not capable of mimicking user activity.

 

[piquiteco]

@Trident do you have much contact with checkpoint?

 

[Trident]

@Trident do you have much contact with checkpoint?

Contact as in using Harmony Endpoint or contact as in talking to people from the company?

 

[jerzy601]

there are no winners and losers both programs are good.
Much has been said and written about these two programs.

 

[Bot]

I'm a Kaspersky user after I recently was infected by Malware. I switched to it, and immediately it removed the threat.
I've seen some discussion with Kaspersky VS ESET, and I wonder, which is better at Extreme Settings. ESET has like a aggressive filter, which I dont think Kaspersky has, it just has Deeper Heuristics. But Kaspersky is the king of Behavioral Detection, with Sys Watcher, Opentip, and also a very good scanner to pair with it. So, which is better? I've made posts asking about Kaspersky, and this is just curiosity, I'm probably not gonna switch if ESET is better.

Both Kaspersky and ESET are reputable antivirus software that offer robust protection against malware. However, which one is better at "Extreme Settings" depends on what you mean by that term. If you're referring to the software's default maximal protection settings, then both are capable of providing excellent protection against even the most advanced threats.

Kaspersky is known for its outstanding behavioral detection features, which includes technologies like Sys Watcher and OpenTip, allowing it to detect and mitigate threats that are not yet in its virus definitions database. It also offers features like Deeper Heuristics, which allows for a more in-depth analysis of the behavior of possible malware, enabling it to detect previously unknown viruses.

On the other hand, ESET's aggressive filter utilizes intricate algorithms to precisely classify and detect threats, making it an effective defender against malware. ESET also implements a range of advanced features like machine learning-based detection and full disk encryption, making it a comprehensive security solution.

Ultimately, your choice between the two depends on your specific preferences. Both Kaspersky and ESET are capable of providing excellent protection. It's best to try both and see which one is most effective for you as every system is different.

 

[Xeno1234]

ok so as I can see I think Kaspersky takes the cake

 

[carl fish]

I used eset too but i find kaspersky's hips application control easier to understand and use, you don't have create rules manually like you have with eset and with vs pro Kaspersky is great.

 

[Trident]

I used eset too but i find kaspersky's hips application control easier to understand and use, you don't have create rules manually like you have with eset and with vs pro Kaspersky is great.

Kaspersky IDS/AC (I keep using the legacy name as well as some may not know the name was changed) can be turned into a default-deny tool easily. You don’t need that many rules if you are running just verified apps. This is not possible with Eset, you will have to create a variety of manual rules and it will display loads of questions and alerts. Eset HIPS work best if you have nothing better to do than sitting down and dealing with your AV for a good period of time (at least a week) to iron out the HIPS situation.

So I think there is a clear winner here.

 

[Xeno1234]

Kaspersky IDS/AC (I keep using the legacy name as well as some may not know the name was changed) can be turned into a default-deny tool easily. You don’t need that many rules if you are running just verified apps. This is not possible with Eset, you will have to create a variety of manual rules and it will display loads of questions and alerts. Eset HIPS work best if you have nothing better to do than sitting down and dealing with your AV for a good period of time (at least a week) to iron out the HIPS situation.

So I think there is a clear winner here.

Does Kaspersky's HIPS protect against like things trying to destroy the system?