We performed a comparison between CylancePROTECT and Deep Instinct Prevention Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"I like the AI and mathematical components that they use."
"Specifically for a Windows domain environment, the product can be customized and pushed via GPO or SCCM without issue."
"The solution is extremely scalable. It's got the hybrid functionality, it's got the system functionality and cloud functionality as well."
"It is a good endpoint solution. It is very easy to manage and detect the threat immediately. It will take the necessary actions."
"We are quite security-focused. Blackberry Protect as an endpoint solution for our service really delivers what we are expecting."
"It provides good insight into the programs, applications, or websites that may need attention."
"Does malware analysis. Blocks WannaCry and other attacks that have come out."
"What's most valuable in CylancePROTECT is the optics feature. I also like its easy-to-use and user-friendly dashboard and monitoring system."
"The CPU consumption is low compared to what I have been using in my current environment, which is Sophos. The footprint is a lot smaller, about a quarter of Sophos. It is very small."
"The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users."
"This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product."
"Deep Instinct complements the solutions we already have. You don't need to rip and replace any antivirus or endpoint that you have. It's easy to use and it's easy to have it side-by-side with other solutions. That makes it really easy to have an additional level of protection, rather than to hassle with doing solution migration."
"Deep Instinct’s prevention-first approach to stopping unknown ransomware and malware is the reason why we purchased the product. The pre-execution versus post-execution is a big piece for us where it is able to stop something before it even hits the box or desktop. That was one of the big reasons why we went with Deep Instinct."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods."
"It has the lowest false-positive ratio that I have come across. I have only had one which was a legitimate file that I had to whitelist. It was for one of the applications I was trying to install and integrate. But the false positive ratio is very low."
"It has given us a more structured approach for detecting and preventing threats. It has machine learning-based detection and prevention. Their engines, in even older versions, are able to pick these viruses and malware. They have posted a lot of use cases online for detecting different viruses and malware that have been out for many years."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The support needs improvement."
"Reporting is an area with shortcomings in CylancePROTECT that needs to be improved."
"The product needs to continue to offer better alerts. In particular, around false positives. It needs to reduce them from happening."
"It is hard to manage."
"The price for this EPP platform is expensive and could be improved."
"The solution should implement AI in the product."
"I would like to see a better UI in terms of sifting through more specific data and providing analytics. A little bit more would be nice."
"The process of whitelisting a script that you want to be able to run can be a little bit difficult, or awkward."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved."
"I would love to see a really exceptional, outstanding level of reporting. I know that's like asking for a unicorn to leap out of the sky with any of these products... When everything works, clients began to wonder: "Everything's fine. Why do we need you?" That's where the reporting capabilities would allow us to really demonstrate: "Hey, here's what's actually going on, Mr. Customer.""
"I think it's probably the administration, especially the administration platform, which could be improved in the solution. It's clunky and hard to navigate, especially for inexperienced technicians."
"If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in the solution."
"They have a manual, but it is not excessive."
"Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern."
"I would like a little more training for the admins."
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
More Deep Instinct Prevention Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 40 reviews while Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is ranked 25th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 18 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform writes "Bolsters prevention with great detection and response capabilities". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Intercept X Endpoint. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.