We performed a comparison between Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security and Intercept X Endpoint 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."The stability is very good."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The features I found most valuable in Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security include anti-malware, spyware detection, firewall, network detection, and user behavior analytics. The solution also gives you a heads-up about operating system misconfiguration."
"The product is a good standard security tool."
"When it comes to the web, according to our customers, this product stands out due to its superior performance compared to others."
"It is perfectly stable. We haven't received any complaints from customers regarding stability or performance. It's been smooth sailing so far."
"I like its unified interface, which also helps you scan Outlook email, for example. Multiple products can be standardized across endpoints or the EDR solution, and the integrations with SIEMs."
"What I appreciate most about Bitdefender are its web content filtering, blocking malicious sites, and its ability to thwart brute force attacks on open ports."
"Virus scan and the ability to remotely install are valuable features. Being able to manage everything in one place and set different policies and rules for different computer types are very useful features. It also has ransomware protection. It is very simple to use, and it is very effective."
"Protection is the most valuable feature."
"Synchronization with the firewall is most valuable."
"We use Sophos Intercept X for Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) and Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS) in our organization."
"The most valuable features are ease of use and the GUI."
"The product is user-friendly."
"The forensics within the solution are quite good. The ransomware mitigation is also impressive."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"One of the best features of Sophos Intercept is that it repairs without slowing down the system."
"This product integrates well with Sophos firewalls and should be seriously considered by Sophos Firewall clients."
"Detections could be improved."
"The support needs improvement."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"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."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"It could be simplified a little bit for firewall rules and blocking specific IP addresses. It would be nice to have an option to upload a CSV or XLSX file of IP addresses to be blacklisted or to be able to specify a range as attempted logins from botnets and people attempting to access network accounts is an increasing issue across the board."
"My main concern is that it's a bit heavy for some devices. Like Kaspersky or McAfee, it uses more RAM or memory. Similar to that, it causes issues for users and their own resources, similar to that. If you deploy on old legacy devices with only 1GB of RAM, then it could be a problem."
"Sometimes the response from Technical Support takes more time than usual because level three support is not in Brazil."
"The lack of detecting security threats and high memory usage need to be improved."
"They've got all this training that's available, but it involves stuff that doesn't really encompass the solution as a whole."
"The firewall capabilities could benefit from an upgrade since it lacks a high level of granularity and control."
"Potential areas for improvement could be more accessible and immediate support for critical situations, especially considering the regulatory challenges in healthcare."
"The solution must be more user-friendly."
"This solution is not in the high ratings on many of the top review sites. This solution has to be near the top for me to continue using it."
"It would be beneficial if you could expand support for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 without charging an additional fee."
"The problem is that if you have a lot of different components going on, each managed under a different umbrella, then you're going to be spending a lot of time hopping back and forth between the different components to see, "Well, I got hit here. What did my firewall see? I got hit in the firewall, the firewall says it allowed that attack in, did it land on anything to compromise any of my endpoints?""
"We are not able to merge the sub-estates. If we create multiple sub-states and there may be instances where a user is in a different sub-state, it may not be possible for us to relocate that user from one sub-state to another through the console. We have to merge them manually which is not ideal."
"It would be a value-add if they can include integration with other technologies or solutions, like Fortinet, Blue Coat, etc."
"Deployment on cloud needs to be carried out manually."
"There is room for improvement in terms of stability and updates."
"The majority of our systems are MacBooks and their solution release cycle is slow to endorsing or support the MacBook's latest OS or hardware platform. For example, when Sophos macOS Big Sur version 11 was released, it took them a while to support this version of OS. A similar situation occurred when the MacBook M1 hardware CPU was released. They have not fully supported the native M1 CPU to this day. They need to speed up the solutions release cycle."
More Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is ranked 24th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 23 reviews while Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 100 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is rated 8.2, while Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security writes "Gives a good snapshot of what's going on". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is most compared with ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, HP Wolf Security, Seqrite Endpoint Security and Trend Micro Apex One, whereas Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Seqrite Endpoint Security. See our Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs. Intercept X Endpoint 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.