Microsoft Security Essentials vs Avira vs avast! vs AVG: Best free anti-virus/anti-malware program for Windows [3rd Edition]
December 18, 2011 402
Email article | Print article
Without a doubt one of the most popular questions I am asked is “which security software should I use for my computer?” Often times the person asking me the question is looking for a free security solution as opposed to a paid one. To address this question, I have already created a post on best security software. However, now – in this article – I am going to directly address the issue of “should I use Avira, avast!, or AVG?” Of course there are many other free anti-virus/anti-malware software. However, I feel these three are the most popular and most commonly inquired about, hence why I picked them.
Update on December 3, 2010: Because of its growing popularity, and requests made to me by many people, Microsoft Security Essentials is now included in this comparison.
When evaluating security software and trying to decide which one you want to use, there are two main areas which you should look at: Features and performance. So, lets get started.
This review is part of our Best Free Windows Software section. Check out more articles on the best free Windows programs from here.
Table of Contents
Summary of Update
Features Comparison
Performance Comparison
Detection Rates
Malware Removal Effectiveness
Computer Impact
In the 3rd edition of dotTech’s guide on Best Free Windows Anti-Virus/Anti-Malware the following changes have been made:
- Features Comparisonsection has been updated to reflect new features added to Avira Free, avast! Free, AVG Free, and Microsoft Security Essentials since the 2nd edition of this article was written. All four made tweaks and modifications to their existing features; the major new features are:
- Avira Free – “WebGuard”
- avast! Free – Behavior blocker, “Auto Sandbox”, “Script Shield”, “WebRep”
- AVG Free – Largely unchanged
- Microsoft Security Essentials – Behavior blocker, “Network Inspection System”
- Performance Comparison section has been updated to reflect new on-demand and retrospective detection rates for Avira Free, avast! Free, and Microsoft Security Essentials. AVG Free did not participate in the latest retrospective tests so AVG Free’s detection rates have been updated only for on-demand tests.
- Performance Comparison’s sub-section Speed and Computer Usage has been rewritten with a new source and renamed to Computer Impact.
- Performance Comparison now includes a new sub-section, Malware Removal Effectiveness.
(Click on the chart to view it in full size.)
In terms of features, as you can see in the chart above, all four programs provide the necessary fundamental protection. However, it is worth noting that neither of the programs provide full/advanced phishing protection; you will have to cough up money for paid versions to get full/advanced phishing protection. Or, you could just be careful about what links you click; and double-check to make sure the website you are at is who it claims to be since phishing success heavily depends on social engineering and user ambivalence.
Furthermore, while all four programs provide the fundamentals, avast! is the most notable one for going “above and beyond” the basics and providing a little extra bang for the buck (or lack thereof). In other words, avast! provides more “extra” features than the other three, although AVG Free also has some nice extras. It also should be noted Avira Free’s “WebGuard” requires users to install Avira Toolbar, which is powered by Ask.com; and Microsoft Security Essentials has an interesting feature called “Network Inspection System” — a guard against network-based exploits.
Lastly, even though Microsoft Security Essentials is the only one to not prompt users with advertisements it must be noted that the ads in avast! Free are non-intrusive and embedded within the main console window – they are not the popup ads Avira Free is notorious for and AVG Free sometimes displays.
(Click on the chart to view it in full size.)
(Click on the chart to view it in full size.)
When viewing the above test results, keep a few things in mind:
- The On-Demand Anti-Malware Tests are tests done on the security software with all their features enabled (with all settings set to the highest possible). The Retrospective/Proactive Anti-Malware Tests are tests done specifically on the security softwares’ heuristics capabilities; their capabilities to protect against unknown/new malware that have no signatures. It needs to be mentioned that heuristics is not the only feature that security software use against unknown/new malware. Other feature, such as behavior blocking, also help detect unknown/new malware; however only the heuristics feature (and no other features, such as behavior blocking) was tested in the Retrospective/Proactive Anti-Malware Tests.
- For the The On-Demand Anti-Malware Tests
- Microsoft Security Essentials had “very few” false positives; Avira had “few” false positives; avast! had “few” false positives; and AVG had “many” false positives.
- Avira scanned at “fast” speed; avast! scanned at “fast” speed; AVG scanned at “average” speed; and Microsoft Security Essentials scanned at “slow” speed.
- The tests were conducted 1-5 months ago. In other words, Avira, avast!, AVG, and MSE (Microsoft Security Essentials) may have improved (or degraded) their performance since these tests were conducted. These are the versions of each program used for both of the above tests:
- The tests were conducted using the free version of Avira (“Avira AntiVir Personal” is another name for Avira Free); free and paid version of AVG, respectively for each test; and free version of avast!. Microsoft Security Essentials, of course, is free by definition.
Because of the above mentioned points,
- The performance of each software today may be different than when the tests were conducted.
- The performance of the free edition AVG may perform slightly differ than what is shown above since paid version for AVG was used for one test.
However, keeping that in mind, for the purposes of a simple comparison these test results work just fine because they give general indications, which is what we are looking for.
That being said, the results are a clear indication of Avira’s detection superiority. Not only does Avira have the highest on-demand detection rates, but it also tops the chart for retrospective tests; all with fast scanning and few false positives. avast! comes in a close second with healthy on-demand and retrospective rates, fast scanning, and few false positives. MSE is fourth in on-demand detection but does very well in retrospective tests and comes out on top when it comes to false positives. (It should be noted MSE’s lower on-demand rates help it do better in terms of false positives: It detects less so there is less chance of it to have false positives.) AVG, in my opinion, is the most disappointing of the lot. It doesn’t do too badly in on-demand but does terrible for retrospective and has many false positives.
Based off just these test results, Avira and avast! are definitely my two top picks, with MSE a close third. However, the tests were conducted in a lab setting for benchmark purposes. In other words, they don’t exactly reflect “real life”. In real-life usage the protection between all four program will be similar because most user activity will fall within areas covered by all four. I may be a bit bold when I say this but the differences between all four software will typically only be felt when conducting benchmarks or tests.
(Click on the chart to view it in full size.)
Being able to detect malware has value in of itself; simply knowing you are infected is worthwhile. However, an anti-virus/anti-malware program that cannot remove malware is probably one you don’t want to have. Hence in the 3rd edition of dotTech’s guide on Best Free Windows Anti-Virus/Anti-Malware we look at the results of a malware removal effectiveness test.
Before we discuss the results it must be noted this malware removal effectiveness test had limited scope — it only used ten samples. It is hard, and frankly not fair or logical, to draw authoritative conclusions based on a test that only used ten samples. However, for the purposes of a non-authoritative indicator, this test will do just fine… as long as you keep in mind the limited scope.
That said, Avira once again tops the charts. MSE comes in a close second with AVG and avast! lagging as distant third and fourth, respectively. As I said, this test used only ten samples so we can’t say avast! or AVG are incompetent at removing malware while Avira or MSE are the best. The results very well could have been different if different ten malware samples were picked. (That is why having a large, randomized sample size is important in any test.) However, I believe it is fair to say with its combined stellar performance on-demand and retrospective detection rates and malware removal effectiveness, Avira more than makes up in performance what it lacks in features.
(Click on the chart to view it in full size.)
(Click on the chart to view it in full size.)
(Click on the chart to view it in full size.)
NOTE: Avira Free 2012, avast! Free v6, AVG AntiVirus 2012, and Microsoft Security Essentials v2.1 were used for the above tests.
Generally speaking, the computer impact of all four software is about the same. True, avast! does come out on top but only by a small margin; and this small margin will only be noticed when benchmarking — not in real-life usage. Really the only test worth noting is opening Word and opening PDF. In this test avast! out shines the other three on the first run (subsequent run they all perform the same). All other aspects of the Computer Impact test end up with results that are too close to draw lines between.
(For those that don’t know, PC Mark is a professional, industry-recognized benchmarking tool. The higher PC Mark score, the better. However, when it comes to PC Mark, few points here and there have no significant meaning. If PC Mark scores were drastically different, such as 50 or more, then it would be worth looking at.)
Note: All tests referenced in all Performance Comparison sub-sections of this article were not conducted by dotTech. They (the tests) were conducted by AV-Comparatives.org, an authority on security software testing. I attained permission to re-publish AV-Comparatives’ results on dotTech when I originally wrote this article.
While there are some noteworthy aspects – such as Microsoft Security Essential’s low false positive count or avast!’s lowest computer impact or Avira’s best detection and removal performance – there is no one “winner” between Microsoft Security Essentials, Avira Free, avast! Free, and AVG Free. To try to determine which one is the “best” is like trying to split hairs; it is hard to do and it hurts. In real-life situations, all four programs will provide users with excellent protection.
However, with that being said, if I were to rank these four I would rank Avira and avast! as my top two picks; Avira for its detection and malware removal and avast! for its features and lowest computer impact. Microsoft Security Essentials and AVG come after Avira and avast!, with each providing one or two unique features that have potential to win over users.
Now, what program you should use comes down to your specific needs and desires. Want the most features? avast! Free is the way to go. Are you looking for the best detection rates and don’t care about anything else? Avira Free is for you. Want a simple anti-malware program that provides great protection without nagging ads? Microsoft Security Essentials beckons you. Worried about network security? Microsoft Security Essentials’ “Network Inspection System” may serve you well. Are you a social network addict? Go with AVG Free for it has “Social Network Protection”. Hate false positives? Avoid AVG and consider Microsoft Security Essentials. Dislike slow scan times? Don’t get Microsoft Security Essentials. Surf the web a lot, besides your frequent websites? avast! Free’s “Web Shield” provides better specialized protection in that area than the other three programs. Download lots of software? avast! Free’s “Auto Sandbox” may be your next best friend.
I have provided you with the facts; now the choice of Microsoft Security Essentials, Avira Free, avast! Free, or AVG free is in your hands. Whichever one you pick, rest assured all four will serve you well.
Avira Free AntiVirus
Supported OS: Windows 2000+
Avira AntiVir Personal homepage [download link]
avast! Free Antivirus
Supported OS: Windows XP+
avast! Free Antivirus homepage [download link]
AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition
Supported OS: Windows 2000+
AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition homepage [download link]
Microsoft Security Essentials
Supported OS: Windows XP and higher
Microsoft Security Essentials homepage
Originally written on February 14, 2010. 2nd edition posted on December 3, 2010. 3rd edition posted on December 18, 2011.














![Why I switched from Avast to Avira: better computer performance and speed [Opinion]](http://cdn.dottech.org/media/2013/03/speed-134x90.jpg)

![[Android] Avira Free Android Security helps locate your lost device, remotely lock and wipe data, block unwanted SMS and calls, and more](http://cdn.dottech.org/media/2013/01/unnamed-41-134x90.jpg)

Until now Avira make’s a very good job for me.
Avira is the king. :)
I use AVG, but ironically despite you’re conclusion Ashraf, the graphs above somewhat make it ok for me to have it, since for me AVG is a secondary main-stream protection program.
@wallpaperstock: +1 for Avira, then =P.
@Samuel: I guess if you think about AVG in that sense, than ya any “secondary” protection that provides as much protection as AVG is great.
AVG is the worst POS you could ever install on any machine.
I’m a computer tech and I’m constantly cleaning machines that are infected with this garbage app running.
@Ashraf: I actually was referencing how it has the least impact on the system.
@Rick: Ouch.
@Samuel: Oh. I think I will update the above post to include some other tests results which will show that Avira has less of an impact on your computer than AVG.
Use Avira or Avast in combination with Iobit 360 if you want to use free resource,but i don’t recomand to use in the same time with a commercial antivirus suite(because add a new firewall) or free or comercial firewall.To many firewall will stop network comunication.Also remember that exist firewall in s.o.What firewall will be your choise to everythink work well?.
@Ashraf: I think that’s called rigging :)
Just to show you an example of how bad it is.
I cleaned a machine that had over 20 trojans and processes running,and AVG didn’t make a peep.
Uninstalled it and installed Avira,as soon as I rebooted Avira started going crazy detecting all these infected files.
Had to actually close Avira so I could run Malware bytes to clean it up.
AVG HAD ALLOWED THIS MALWARE TO RUN UNIMPEDED FOR MONTHS………..ABSOLUTE GARBAGE.
@Samuel: Lol. Not exactly. These test results are from other sources and do different tests than what the above already show. You will see, just hang on.
@Rick: Bitter hate of AVG for life I see =P.
Two things:
-Microsoft Security Essentials is right now using under 1.5MB of RAM. I’m going to start a scan to see how long it takes to scan a 12.9GB hard drive (picture files). TIME TAKEN: 44 seconds. That seems a little low-but it’s probably because they’re all picture files. Now I’m going to scan a 226GB partition (140GB used). TIME TAKEN: Ok, it’s still scanning 7 minutes later. I’ll post when it finishes, but remember–this is 140, not 13, GB.
-Is this a typo?
“As expected, there is one ‘winner’ between Avira, avast!, and AVG.”
Shouldn’t it be, “As expected, there is no one ‘winner’ between Avira, avast!, and AVG.”
@Locutus: Are you sure you got that 1.5 MB from the actual program that does the protection and not the UI? Because that’s the only way my system agree’s with that.
@Rick: I don’t think AVG is that bad if you couple it with a secondary defence line of, e.g. the freeversions of Malwarebytes or SuperAntiSpyware.
My best choice for AV? NOD32.
@Samuel: Oops. Forgot to click “Show all processes from all users”. It’s taking up ~1% (64MB) of my RAM. Still scanning.
@Locutus: That agree’s with my system. All good then. Can’t wait to see the results!
Hmmm! How do the paid versions of each of these compare to the free versions? I have AVG paid version. AVG is what is recommended by the “techies” I know.
I started with the free version and after a crash I had to reinstall it. At that time I couldn’t find the “long-term” free, so I just paid for the upgraded package.
Thanks!
@Ashraf/Samuel: Actually forget it. I will leave it as is. I just realized the new data would be much more confusing than I want it to be. The data would just reinforce what I have already presented above so I think we can do fine without it. (It would show the same thing the “Launch Application” chart shows, except with more data – Avira has least impact, avast! second, and AVG third.)
@Doru: See my best security software post for best firewall.
@Locutus: Thanks – fixed now. I will do a separate article on MSE later, hopefully.
@Betty: Well aside from the “extra” features you get in the paid version, they are both basically the same thing. Honestly, if you were to pay for a software, I would not get AVG… there are so many better choices out there for paid!
I have been using Avira for quite some time and find it to be very compatible with Comodo Firewall I have on my system. Have had a few ‘false positives’ with Avira which can be annoying at times.
After reading this, I think I will try avast. Am always looking for a ‘better mousetrap’. Will see if avast and Comodo can coexist.
Thanks, Ashraf, for taking your time to provide us with this information.
I switched to Avast! about a year ago because AVG didn’t play nicely with my computer, and I’ve had no problems with it. I like the price!
@Samuel: It’s kind of hard to give results when the computer overheats and powers off before they’re finished… also, it’s at 50MB right now… so +15MB when scanning. I’ll rerun the time test.
I’ve tried Avira, AVG, and others, but I always come back to Avast!
@Samuel: Which reminds me, is this off topic, but are you still planning on writing that program that records computer resource usage for designated software, like we discussed so long ago? It would be mighty helpful in future reviews, especially ones on AVs.
Tried AVG and AVIRA, but am currently favouring AVAST.
Read somewhere recently that AVAST had improved, and was preferable. Seems OK so far!!
@4624Raymond: Cool =).
@Everyone: The post has been updated to fix a mis-labeling error I made and to reflect the fact that AVG Free is available for free to small businesses in Germany, Brazil, and Japan.
@Betty: AVG use to be the big one to get if you wanted a free AV. Not so true any more. It’s still one of the big ones but not the biggest.
@Ashraf: Ok, works for me.
@Locutus: Ouch, that’s gata be no fun!
@Ashraf: I am in fact still working on it, I ran into some problems, mostly getting the most out of it with out making it not hurt system performance.