We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Intercept X Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point Harmony Endpoint provides a sophisticated defense against ransomware and phishing attacks. The solution is praised for its forensic analysis and VPN connectivity. Intercept X Endpoint combines two products into one solution, offering strong performance, server protection, and efficient threat management capabilities. Users say Check Point could improve its endpoint vulnerability management and threat-hunting features. Intercept X Endpoint could benefit from better integration with third-party vendors and improved support for virtual infrastructures.
Service and Support: While several users lauded Check Point support for its problem-solving skills, others said there is room for improvement. Some users found Intercept X Endpoint's support team knowledgeable and supportive, while others expressed dissatisfaction with responsiveness.
Ease of Deployment: Setting up Check Point Harmony Endpoint is uncomplicated, and one admin is usually enough for the job. It may take time to configure the solution due to the wide range of available blades. 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.
Pricing: Users generally find the price of Check Point Harmony Endpoint to be reasonable and competitive. They perceive it as more cost-effective than other solutions, though some said it could be lower. Intercept X Endpoint is generally seen as fairly priced, but some users think it’s on the higher end of the price scale.
ROI: Check Point Harmony Endpoint provides a comprehensive and economical solution, and customers say the product has helped them grow. Users say that Intercept X Endpoint offers exceptional defense against ransomware and zero-day threats, leading to a positive return on investment.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Check Point Harmony Endpoint over Intercept X Endpoint. Check Point Harmony Endpoint provides a robust defense against ransomware and phishing attacks. While Intercept X earned high marks for its threat management capabilities, user reviews indicate that Check Point Harmony Endpoint offers a more comprehensive and effective solution for endpoint security.
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"It scans all the endpoints in your cloud and on-premises for vulnerabilities, threats, and malware attacks."
"It's great for securing our endpoints from any external attacks."
"The standout features are primarily EDR and MDR."
"It's a scalable product as it is a cloud offering."
"We have found the stability to be very reliable."
"We were under an attack in our environment, and the Check Point response was good because we didn't lose anything."
"The communication with the console is very dynamic and remote, without the need to return to the computer locally."
"It helps us to detect running malicious activity in our network and after the COVID situation, most users are working from home where it becomes very difficult for IT admin to maintain security so such type of solution definitely helps us to prevent cyber attacks."
"The key factor that attracted me to Sophos Intercept X was the multi-platform. I have multiple clients that have mixed environments of Mac and Windows. I am able to deliver a standard solution, regardless of the platform."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the CryptoGuard in Sophos. In a case of a ransomware attack, this feature comes into action to protect us."
"It is easy to change the size of its capabilities, i.e. to expand processes or scale the size of users."
"I appreciate the ability to use the latest endpoint protection features in case of an infection or cyber threat. This is especially true when using the product with a Sophos firewall solution, like the XG series. They collaborate effectively in the event of a cyber threat."
"The dashboard is user-friendly."
"We most value the price and interface quality with Sophos Intercept X. We focus on solution quality."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Sometimes, the Cloud Management Portal can become unresponsive or take a long time to process a query. This in turn will cause the browser to freeze, which will require closing and reopening of your browser."
"They could be focused on the analysis of USB devices."
"Enhanced behavioral analytics would provide a deeper understanding of endpoint activities, fortifying our defenses against sophisticated cyber adversaries."
"We know that Check Point has a very good database about threats even Check Point tries to make this EDR stable still there are some issues we were facing after upgrading or taking TAC to help its got resolved but Check Point really needs to work on metadata."
"The heartbeat interval must be improved."
"The next release should consider a strong threat detection mechanism that can categorize various levels of attacks for faster analysis."
"We would like to make the documentation for more modern solutions like the Harmony family easier to find."
"This is one of the most innovative solutions due to the fact that it includes many real-time content filtering features, management, and assurance of the transactions of what went in or out of our peripherals. That said, it is important to integrate other solutions to continue innovating in the market."
"I would like to have a built-in firewall, rather than having to integrate one."
"We would like more application control in order to be able to schedule times and access."
"Sophos has a lot of different features. Some of them are tied to different clients, which may mean that different prices or licenses have to be added on. It can be a little bit confusing if you're not familiar with the logic of how they work. They can make it a little bit clearer."
"The product defends very well on its own but could possibly use enhancement in giving users more controls."
"The technical support is the lone sore-point when dealing with this product."
"It's a bit heavy on the computers. So once you install it, the computer slows down. It is a resource-intensive solution."
"Stability-wise, we had issues with some clients which had to be dealt with manually. The issue was with that installation part."
"Technical support can be improved. There could be shared support, i.e. where someone in Egypt can respond."
Check Point Harmony Endpoint is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 104 reviews while Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 101 reviews. Check Point Harmony Endpoint is rated 8.8, while Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Endpoint writes "Excellent anti-ransomware protection, zero-day phishing protection, and web browsing filtering". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". Check Point Harmony Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Intercept X Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.