We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Trellix Endpoint Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Intercept X Endpoint combines two products into one solution, offering strong performance, server protection, and efficient threat management capabilities. Trellix Endpoint Security is highly valued for its easy administration options and reliability. Intercept X Endpoint could benefit from better integration with third-party vendors and improved support for virtual infrastructures. Reviews suggest that Trellix could reduce resource consumption and improve user-friendliness.
Service and Support: Some users found Intercept X Endpoint's support team knowledgeable and supportive, while others expressed dissatisfaction with responsiveness. Some users have found the support for Trellix Endpoint Security helpful and reliable, while others have encountered ineffective assistance and communication problems.
Ease of Deployment: Intercept X Endpoint has a straightforward initial setup, with quick installation and simple configuration and maintenance. Some users said they occasionally encountered issues that required reinstallation. The setup process for Trellix Endpoint Security varies in difficulty, depending on the user's experience with McAfee and general technical expertise.
Pricing: Intercept X Endpoint is generally seen as fairly priced, but some users think it’s on the higher end of the price scale. Some find Trellix’s price reasonable and competitive, while others believe it could be lowered.
ROI: Users say that Intercept X Endpoint offers exceptional defense against ransomware and zero-day threats, leading to a positive return on investment. Trellix Endpoint Security provides significant time savings.
"The EDR features are valuable. By getting the EDR features, we have more control over the device. We have information about events in real-time and more protection against zero-day threats and zero-day vulnerabilities. We can monitor every event or action that a device is going through. We can get an idea if it is something malicious or if we have to take any actions."
"A crucial aspect for our team is the inclusion of identity and access management tools from the vendor."
"The most valuable feature is probably the aggregation and correlation of the different telemetry points with Defender for Identity, Defender for Endpoint, and Defender for Cloud Apps. All of these various things are part of that portal. We've wanted that single pane of glass for years."
"I have found the ability to delete unwanted threats beneficial."
"Another noteworthy feature that I find appealing in Microsoft Defender is the credit-backed simulation. This feature enables organizations to train their users on effectively responding to phishing emails through a simulated training environment."
"The unified view of the threat landscape on a central dashboard is the most valuable feature."
"The product integrates security into one tool instead of having third-party security tools."
"It's a great threat intelligence source for us, providing alerts for things it detects on the network and on the machines. We've used it often when there is a potential incident to see what was done on a computer. That works quite nicely because you can see everything that the user has done..."
"The initial setup is simple."
"What I have found the most valuable about Sophos Intercept X is the ease of use with management administration and the solution's ability to stop exploits and ransomware."
"The most valuable features are the cloud administration and the strength of the ransomware protection."
"The security on offer is pretty good. We are happy with it."
"It is stable and has a good price. I find it very good."
"We have found the pricing to be reasonable."
"The product efficiently prevents data leakages."
"It's a good antivirus software and has a lot of features. It now integrates with their on-premises firewall, which is perfect."
"We like the management of the ePO, and we like the management console."
"Threat prevention is valuable because most clients use other solutions like antivirus as part of web protection. I don't find that kind of solution useful."
"I have found the most valuable features to be the ability to manage the solution from anywhere and having an overview of the companies security."
"The new central console is better than the earlier one."
"The central management console is powerful. You can manage endpoints, DLP, encryption, and all the other features from a single console."
"The product’s stability and security features enhance user protection and organizational security."
"It's quite easy to install agents."
"It's easy to use and it's very powerful. It offers nice endpoint protection."
"It would be helpful if the solution could scan faster when it comes to scanning attachments to emails."
"I would like more of the features in Defender for 365 to be included in the smaller licenses. Even if I buy a small license and don't need everything, security shouldn't be a question. Security is one of the main aspects of all projects from our side, so it would be nice to have more features in the smaller licenses."
"Advanced attacks could use an improvement."
"While the XDR platform offers valuable functionalities, it falls short of other solutions in its ability to deliver a cohesive identity experience."
"Offboarding latency should be reduced. Even after a device has been successfully offboarded using a particular offboarding script, it still shows up as onboarded."
"From an integration standpoint, it is always improving overall. With Security Copilot coming out, as partners, we are waiting for the GDAP support so that we can actually see Security Copilot on behalf of customers if they subscribe to it."
"Because of the training model, Defender XDR's automatic response sometimes blocks legitimate users and activities. Also, the UI sometimes responds slowly."
"Defender also lacks automated detection and response. You need to resolve issues manually. You can manage multiple Microsoft security products from a single portal, and all your security recommendations are in one place. It's easy to understand and manage. However, I wouldn't say Defender is a single pane of glass. You still need to switch between all of the available Microsoft tools. You can see all the alerts in one panel, but you can't automate remediation."
"The main real-time scanning takes most of the processing power of my notebook."
"The tool should be made compatible with Linux and Microsoft operating systems."
"The policies could be nicer to manage."
"It's a bit heavy on the computers. So once you install it, the computer slows down. It is a resource-intensive solution."
"The detection and the AI capabilities should be improved upon."
"The performance is very slow and should be faster."
"There are not any solutions that are a 10 out of 10. A 10 would be perfect protection with no impact on the performance of the device. This is not the case, there is some impact on the performance of the device."
"They need to focus on their SLA or technical support. They also need to focus on their UI. They should also improve their content filtering tool and update it so that correct categories are there. Sometimes, when I want to block an online gaming website, it is not shown under the correct category. It is shown under another category. They need to review their content filtering tool on a bi-weekly or monthly basis and update the sites and categories. This will be really helpful for them."
"It would be helpful if the controlling of connections coming to the PC could be done from McAfee's side so that we can block those connections."
"Technical support from the vendor is very bad."
"McAfee Endpoint Protection could improve the word control feature."
"The DAC (Dynamic Application Containment) component of this product needs improvement."
"We have had some of our clients not happy with McAfee Endpoint Security because it blocks some of the applications they are trying to use. They should make it easier to unblock applications."
"Patch management is unavailable"
"Tech support is not as helpful as they were in the past."
"Some agents become old and then they don't communicate well any longer."
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 101 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 95 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Trend Micro Deep Security. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.