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)
Thanks for the article and keeping it current.
The recommendation seems to be that any of the four will work well for malware protection. Given that, I wonder which is the “best” in terms of overhead. Which will have the least impact on the performance of my PC – browsing, email, etc.? I’d guess the answer could vary by OS and configuration (e.g., RAM), but I’d definitely be curious to see some test results and discussion on that.
And since I’m in the process of setting up my Black Friday laptop purchase (and plan to replace the McAfee that came with it), this is a very timely issue for me.
@all
my avast!, is detecting autorun.inf malware in my USB flash drive, does anybody know whether it’s a false one or something i should take care of?
i really want to switch to MSSE (better IMO, as it is offered by the OS maker only and by now MSSE should be smart and competitive enough), but don’t know whether it will do as good job as avast!/avira.
NOTE: i have also noticed avira has stopped the nag screen (in my other laptop)!!!
@Jim Van Damme
i think having silverlight is good as it actually helps to bring a new level of interactivity wherever the web works…genuine advantage detects whether you are using a pirated OS or not, and IMO, it is their right to check before they offer you a free AV.
Until MSE was on the market I was installing AVG free, but it was taking to much space and resources, so I started to install to all my clients the MSE. I use it too and it protect me well, time to time it jump out telling me that some thing is wrong and need to be cleaned.
I install too another AV in parallel : Imunet AV http://www.imunet.com . It work on real time from the cloud and can be use with other AV. They timed with ClamAV an other free AV.
Thank for the comparison, I allways was wondering how good or bad was the MSE.
@mukhi:
Autorun isn’t necessarily malware but don’t stick any unknown thumb drive in your machine without disabling it.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/noautorun/
Autorun is how the DoD got hacked.
I always thought MSE wasn’t as light as everyone was saying. Sure it’s simple, and since I am a Windows fanboy I’m very proud of Microsoft’s achievement, but installing MSE on my 512MB Ram PC (from 4 years ago) did not work out well at all. I’m still with Avira, and I can say I won’t be switching anytime soon unless some significant thing occurs.
@Jyo: I presume you’re running XP. Either buy some more RAM, pull the internet plug out, switch to Linux, or be VERY careful.
@Jim Van Damme: You must be profoundly insecure to be Linux trolling in a review of software exclusively for Windows OS. That you’re extolling BeginUx Linux confirms the diagnosis. Take a pill and move on.
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned yet or not – but the latest AVG free antivirus includes a behavior monitor. AVG included the Identity Protection although it’s not mentioned very well on the AVG web site. AVG Identity Protection used to be a stand alone product as well but is no longer offered for sale in that regard. Originally ID Protection was Sana Security Safe Connect but that company was purchased by AVG. The product is also included in some Norton products as the “Antibot” protection.
On the other hand, the behavior monitor included in Avast! is still in its relative infancy and is not really much more than the anti-rootkit monitor. It is supposed to be enhanced in Avast version 5.1. There’s also expected to be a behavior monitor in Avira’s next free version and MSE version 2 is supposed to have a behavior monitor as well. MSE already includes heuristics and dynamic generic signatures.
@acr: Are you 100% sure about the behavior monitor/identity protect in AVG Free? Their website does not list such features, but I will update the chart to reflect this if I can get some concrete proof. (No offense, I am not calling you a liar or anything.)
@Leslie: I find it hard to believe avast! would spam, but I use my spam e-mail for such registrations so I cannot confirm or deny this.
@Lady Fitzgerald: You are right — I haven’t used Avira in a while so I forgot to mention Avira’s annoying popup ads. I will update the post ASAP to mention this.
@Ashraf: May I suggest that instead of updating this post you just make a new one…you could even do a yearly thing like PCMag does.
@Samuel: Yes you may suggest it =P
To be honest I didn’t think about just creating a new post instead of updating my current one, but it is a good idea. The only problem is backlinks to this article are all over the Internet. If I stop updating this and just create new posts, the new visitors here may not understand that this article is outdated and there is a new article regarding the same issue.
Plus, there are some important people that are subscribed to the comments here, if you get what I mean.
@Ashraf: Well to solve the problem of backlinks, you could include in the top of the articles a link to the most recent one. As for the comments, hmmm, that one I’m not as sure about…though we could all just subscribe to the new one.
@Samuel: Yeah if I did write new articles I would do that. Problem is that never works 100% – some people click on the link at the top and some people just ignore it.
@Ashraf: True some people will ignore it but those that do may not read the rest of the article that well anyways…sometimes we have to accept imperfection.
@Samuel: This is true. I will think about your suggestion. Now let’s get back to the topic at hand, shall we? :-)
@Ashraf: This isn’t the topic at hand? How to best serve the dotTech readers?
Well currently I’m using MSE 2.0 Beta, AVG 10.0 Free, and Webroot ISC 7.0.4
@pfk2: Oh no, I was actually RAM trolling.
TO ALL SAYING X IS BETTER THEN Y
STOP IT, THERE IS NOT SUCH THINK IS THE PERFECT ANTI-MALAWARE PROGRAM. THE POINT OF THIS ARTICLE IS TO HELP YOU CHOICE THE RIGHT ONE FOR YOU.
And I though that Apple/Mac vs. Microsoft/Windows was bad!
@Samuel: Yeah I suppose it is… Dang Bill Gates taught you well.
@Jim Van Damme: I will take that comment as the end of this dumb verbal spat between you two. Any thing else will be deleted – you have been warned.
EDIT: I just wanted to clarify my comment was at both Jim Van Damme and pfk2, not just Jim.
Dear Ashraf, I like the way you wrote the article and synthesised the results so beautifully so that a newbie could understand it and feel reassured using any of the 4! a work of art!
@Jim Van Damme: Yes, I do need more RAM. But for the sake of the being “light on resources” argument, I’m just proving my point that MSE isn’t as light as many are boasting about, as least on xp (do note this 512MB Ram pc isn’t my only computer).
And although I have used Linux, I don’t think users have to go to the extent of switching to Linux just for the sake of being more secure from malware – that’s just overkill imho. But that’s not saying Linux is bad, but telling average users to use Linux to be free from viruses is not very wise. But like you said, being “careful” definitely helps.
All can be used fine. use avast now. but had good luck with avira. if not like nag screen ray use this.
gnag.sourceforge.net to block it. only on reboot if memory serves me correct you get nag screen.
@Ashraf: Yes, well I could not believe it either as I have previously used Avast with no such issue. Perhaps they have been hacked ;-)
@Jyo:
i have no intention to hurt other OS users, but windows users don’t believe in security through obscurity. it is clear that windows has a much broader spectrum of software and users than any other OS in the market, and therefore, dealing with security is tricky. it is also evident that free software are doing as good job as the paid ones for general users. as they are all free, we only look for effectiveness, efficiency, footprint and other features. well, currently, these are my security software and observations:
# avast! is my AV. real-time protection is ON. very nice except for its “virus database has been updated” audio comment and system-choking run while scanning. in my other laptop, avira is good (the nag screen stopped!). don’t know why but somehow liked avast! more (influence of ashraf, LOL).
# malwarebytes: AS: on-demand scan if i suspect something. you can’t go without this. although rarely used by me, but saved me many times.
# winpatrol: ON. the name tells you everything about it. warns you if something is trying to install itself without your knowledge, say, yahoo toolbar. well, i find it kinda nagging as it warns me every time i install/update a software. i normally do custom install, therefore, winpatrol sounds redundant for me.
# keyscrambler: ON. saves you from key-loggers.
# linkextend: ON. talks about the safety of the sites.
# returnil: OFF. if i need to install an unknown software or visit an unknown site, i turn virtual mode on and reboot after done. you can’t go wrong with this.
overall, i am happy with these guys. may want to switch to MSSE (MS product, may be better for MS windows) and uninstall winpatrol.
my lappie:
win7pro64 | P8700 | 4 GB DDR3 | 330M | 320 GB 5400 rpm
I have a word of caution when installing Avast Antivirus.z
If you have installed on your PC the program Iobit Avanced System Care and you install Avast Antivirus you may not be able to surf the internet ! why well as far as I can tell it is either Avast or it’s Iobit that changes your TCP/stach and also changes Winsock under windows ! several members of the Avast forum have noticed this and have post many commentes to this problem. The only way to be able to surf the internet is to disable the ” Webshild” , however a solution has been found.
Download a program called “XPCPT Repair”
install and run option Reset TCP/IP Stack. Now run Repair Winsock Issues. re-boot your PC and now you should be able to connect to the Internet.
I tried all this and had my PC back to nornmal. I think Avast is aware.
Regards
John