Kaspersky vs. F-Secure (Pros and Cons)

[superboyAC]

I've searched the web, but can't find a clear answer to this...

I know it's stupid to ask what AV is better, but what are the pros and cons of Kaspersky and
F-secure, since they basically use the same engine.

I've used both, and here is what I can tell:
Kaspersky has more options to customize, and I've heard that even though they use the same enginee,
Kaspersky Personal still detects viruses, malware, etc. at a better rate. Is this true?

F-Secure (I've used the workstation version) is much more simple. However it loads a ridiculous
amount of processes (something like 12). I think Kaspersky only has 2. On the other hand, the
processes don't seem to slow down my system that much, so it may not be a big deal. Now, with
Kaspersky, I definitely felt the resource hit, but I can't remember if v5 did the same.


Any thoughts?

 

[null]

I've searched the web, but can't find a clear answer to this...

I know it's stupid to ask what AV is better, but what are the pros and cons of Kaspersky and
F-secure, since they basically use the same engine.

I've used both, and here is what I can tell:
Kaspersky has more options to customize, and I've heard that even though they use the same enginee,
Kaspersky Personal still detects viruses, malware, etc. at a better rate. Is this true?

Depends on the test. Historically, KAV would sometimes score slightly
higher than F-Secure at the VTC. The most recent test:

http://agn-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/vtc/

gives F-Secure a slight edge. Seems the differences in detection
between them is so miniscule you can ignore detection as a factor, and
base your choice on other factors ... including price.

F-Secure (I've used the workstation version) is much more simple. However it loads a ridiculous
amount of processes (something like 12). I think Kaspersky only has 2. On the other hand, the
processes don't seem to slow down my system that much, so it may not be a big deal. Now, with
Kaspersky, I definitely felt the resource hit, but I can't remember if v5 did the same.

Any thoughts?

For older OS such as Win 9X/ME, KAV version 3.5 available from the
Swiss site:

http://www.avp.ch

is really the cat's meow I hear it's "iffy" though on XP.

Art

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

 

[joel]

Depends on the test. Historically, KAV would sometimes score slightly
higher than F-Secure at the VTC. The most recent test:

http://agn-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/vtc/

gives F-Secure a slight edge. Seems the differences in detection
between them is so miniscule you can ignore detection as a factor, and
base your choice on other factors ... including price.


For older OS such as Win 9X/ME, KAV version 3.5 available from the
Swiss site:

http://www.avp.ch

is really the cat's meow I hear it's "iffy" though on XP.

Art

http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

I had to take F-Secure off my machine because it was so slow it damn
near stopped any file access in its tracks. ( I have a 900Mhz Pent III
machine with 256Mb of RAM.)

In contrast to that situation, I have Kaspersky Personal Pro on mine,
and I have it set at its highest protection point with seemingly no
slow down at all in file access, etc.

Extendia's AVK, with dual engines, which includes the Kaspersky
scanning engine, crashed and/or locked up my machine horribly.

You better trial test any AV before buying. You never know how your
machine will act with it.

 

[Ian Kenefick]

I've searched the web, but can't find a clear answer to this...

I know it's stupid to ask what AV is better, but what are the pros and cons of Kaspersky and
F-secure, since they basically use the same engine.

I've used both, and here is what I can tell:
Kaspersky has more options to customize, and I've heard that even though they use the same enginee,
Kaspersky Personal still detects viruses, malware, etc. at a better rate. Is this true?

F-Secure (I've used the workstation version) is much more simple. However it loads a ridiculous
amount of processes (something like 12). I think Kaspersky only has 2. On the other hand, the
processes don't seem to slow down my system that much, so it may not be a big deal. Now, with
Kaspersky, I definitely felt the resource hit, but I can't remember if v5 did the same.


Any thoughts?

F-Secure uses a multi engine setup

-AVP (Kaspersky) for general malware
-Libra specifically for Macro and Script virus
-Orion as a backup engine to AVP should F-Secure find a virus that AVP
does not yet detect - Orion is also their Heuristic engine.

Kaspersky uses a standalone engine as do most others with the
exception of Gdata.

Kaspersky is lighter on resources for sure but F-Secure has better
auto update mechanism which uses backweb technology. I think the
F-Secure UI is better designed for the average user.

F-Secure publishes update sometimes before Kaspersky Lab in the event
of an outbreak. Currently they F-Secure do not detect what Kaspersky
define as Riskware (Inclusive of Spyware, Adware etc.). They have a
seperate program for this which is rebadged version of Ad-Aware from
Lavasoft to do this but is only available if you buy FSIS 2005.

F-Secure installation is not as simplified as Kaspersky and is more
prone to failure. The F-Secure disinfection routeen is a little bit on
the unstable side also whereas Kaspersky Disinfection routeen seems to
be quick and gets the job done super fast.

Even though the F-Secure team is very professional I think the
application has become fat and sluggish. I think KAV has the edge
because of this.
Best regards - Met vriendelijke groeten - Bien à vous - Mit freundlichen Grüßen - Cordiali Saluti
Ian Kenefick
http://www.ik-cs.com

 

[BW]

When you talk about Kapsersky there A LOT different between ver. 4.5 and
5. Ver. 5 is a completely new and different product.

I have tested both.
4.5 uses about 13,5MB
5 uses about 44MB! And it take a lot longer for WinXP to start up!

Way of testing:
-Take a clean pc - see how much RAM is used in TaskManager
-Install Anti-Virus product check configuration settings and restart
-See how much RAM is used now.

 

[Ian Kenefick]

When you talk about Kapsersky there A LOT different between ver. 4.5 and
5. Ver. 5 is a completely new and different product.

I have tested both.
4.5 uses about 13,5MB
5 uses about 44MB! And it take a lot longer for WinXP to start up!

Way of testing:
-Take a clean pc - see how much RAM is used in TaskManager
-Install Anti-Virus product check configuration settings and restart
-See how much RAM is used now.

Compare current versions only - 4.5 engine is functionally different
to that of 5 since there is additional functionality which requires
more ram.


Best regards - Met vriendelijke groeten - Bien à vous - Mit freundlichen Grüßen - Cordiali Saluti
Ian Kenefick
http://www.ik-cs.com