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.
"In Microsoft 365 vendor products, monitoring and connectivity across all Microsoft and third-party connectors enable viewing of all activity within those environments."
"Having a single pane of glass for all Microsoft security services makes everything much easier. A security analyst can go to a single portal and see everything in one view. The integration of everything into one portal is a huge benefit."
"I like that it's stable. It's been stable for a long time, and Microsoft Defender has done a good job there."
"My clients like Defender's file integrity monitoring. They're monitoring Windows and Linux system files."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a stable solution."
"The product is very easy to use."
"The most valuable features are spam filtering, attachment filtering, and antivirus protection."
"We are connected to Microsoft and have every laptop enrolled. This acts as an endpoint. The tool helps me check security and compliance. I can also check what a device is doing."
"The product is user-friendly."
"It is quite scalable. You can always add more users. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten."
"The deployment is quick. It just depends on the environment and what you may be replacing."
"There are additional security features in Sophos Intercept X as well as proxy rules and settings that help us in minimizing the sites that our agents can go to, even after their work hours."
"Sophos Intercept X is a very effective solution and its being cloud-based is a benefit. Wherever my users are, I can apply policies to them. In the era of mobility, when users are out of the office or they're in different locations, it doesn't matter."
"It is one of the best in terms of technicality."
"It is stable."
"It is a practically maintenance free intelligent system that independently protects environments from malicious attacks."
"The manageability of the product itself is its most valuable aspect. You have the underlying EPO, and on top of it, you can deploy the various components as you require. This is unlike other solutions like Symantec where you have to deploy everything or nothing. With this solution, you can choose to only deploy antivirus or only deploy a firewall, or only something else. I choose the components and that deployment is done through EPO. It makes manageability very flexible."
"The product is quite user-friendly."
"It's easy to use."
"McAfee EndPoint Security has a lot of good features that work well if they are implemented properly."
"Some of McAfee Endpoint Security's main features are it has benefits over normal conventional antivirus solutions because it works much faster."
"Trellix Endpoint Security's dashboard is very flexible, and I can create my own user-specific dashboard depending on user privilege or preference."
"The endpoint protection and disk encryption features are the most valuable."
"The new central console is better than the earlier one."
"The only issue I've had is, when it comes to deployment, the steps I must take around policy setup. That is challenging."
"A simple dashboard without having to use MS Sentinel would be a welcome improvement."
"The Defender agent itself is more compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 11. Other than these two lines, there are so many compatibility issues. Security is not only about Microsoft. The core technical aspects of it are quite good, but it would be good if they can better support non-Microsoft solutions in terms of putting the agents directly into VMware and other virtualization solutions. There should be more emphasis on RHEL and other operating systems that we use, other than Windows, in the server category."
"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."
"Microsoft tends to provide too many features, which makes the solution prone to bugs."
"I'd like to see a wider solution that includes not only desktop devices but also other devices, such as servers, storage cabinets, switching equipment, et cetera."
"The solution could improve by having better machine learning and AI. Additionally, the interface, documentation, and integration could be better."
"Offboarding latency should be reduced. Even after a device has been successfully offboarded using a particular offboarding script, it still shows up as onboarded."
"The Data Loss Prevention module can be better. It should also have threat hunting capabilities."
"The product’s DDoS and AI features must be improved."
"It could be a bit easier to implement."
"When I use a proxy, I can bypass Sophos, which is an area that needs improvement."
"Intercept X could enhance its support services, particularly in terms of response time and resource allocation."
"Through Sophos Central I would like to see the ability to zero in and produce a report about the challenges being faced by a particular machine and user, to know if a virus is appearing only on that specific machine or also on others."
"Sophos needs to create a YouTube channel with educational material for technicians or engineers."
"The ADR functionalities feel like they aren't mature enough. It hasn't been a long time since Sophos has offered reproduction. Due to the fact that it's so young, it has fewer functionalities than other and more mature ADR solutions."
"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."
"The product could do more to keep administration alerted to detected threats on endpoints."
"The interface is complex."
"When it runs in the background of the endpoint, the devices get slowed down for some applications."
"The management console is a little bit difficult to understand for admins. You need a lot of time in order to become familiar with that. It is a little bit complicated and not too easy to understand. Its price can also be improved. Its price is higher than its competitors. McAfee also needs to have better cloud integration and more data centers in the EU. The cloud center should be in Europe or in Germany. In Germany, it is really important to have access to your data within the same country. Customer data needs to be placed and processed in the same country."
"It would be a lot easier if I could add multiple user accounts within a single device."
"Users can just install software into their computers. We need some sort of application control system that, if there are any pieces of software that are not whitelisted, then the solution could flag it or maybe alert the administers. That would be very helpful."
"While we are pleased with the endpoint solution, there should also be a separate one for the firewall."
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.