Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs Trellix Endpoint Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Bitdefender GravityZone Ent...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
24th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Virtualization Security (4th)
Trellix Endpoint Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is 0.8%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security is 3.5%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Kevin Mabry - PeerSpot reviewer
Gives a good snapshot of what's going on
The risk management tool does not have reporting, which I feel to be a huge mistake. While I can go into it and run the scan for the all the information, I must enter each thing individually to see what I need. I can't print or email a report to somebody in a different environment or to any of my clients for the purpose of advising how they must proceed. All I can do is go into and look at it. It would be nice to able to take the report and determine what must be focused on most critically, as opposed to merely being given a tremendous amount of information. This should be addressed. The solution should also do a better job of informing a person of what happened. The son of one of my clients, who has the solution installed in his house, was blocked from playing a certain game. While the solution only informed the person that it was blocked, it did not state what it had blocked. With another client who was in the middle of playing a game in his office, the solution blocked this but provided no telemetry whatsoever. I had to search in an attempt to see what was being blocked. Turning the solution off, however, enabled the game to work perfectly. It was blocking it for some reason, but I had no clue why it was doing so. The solution should be providing reports of everything, not just specific incidents. The solution has many features, but does not inform one of what was actually done, leaving a person in the dark when it comes to things that are not apparent. For specific threats, one need simply login to know what is transpiring. When there was a need to involve support, I would be instructed to download a certain software for gathering information. But, this is not how things should be. Support should be providing the information it possesses of what transpired.
AhmedEl-Tayeb - PeerSpot reviewer
Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services
Some of our products have a first and second line owned by us. We are giving support services to the customers instead of the vendor. Some other products are supported directly by the technology vendor, however. Technical support from the vendor is very bad. Usually, when the customer submits a ticket, they put a severity level on the case. Whenever the case is very important, and there is a real malfunction in the product on the customer side, and there is something down that needs someone to have a look immediately, it takes more time than it should to even engage with the customer. When someone has to contact the customer and have a remote session within the customer environment, they sometimes lack in terms of communication with the customer. The support centers are located in the East and not all have an acceptable level of English in order to communicate directly with the customer.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We use patch management to keep our software up-to-date, significantly mitigating our risk of vulnerabilities. We're confident that Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security will either already know about new threats and have updated our machines, or they'll advise us quickly on mitigating them until an update is available."
"The most valuable features of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security are remote administration and deployment, comprehensive firewall protection, malware protection, and antivirus."
"I find Bitdefender to be very light. When we were using the other versions, users would complain that they would make the computers slow. But since we have deployed Bitdefender, we haven't had that."
"We find the protection the solution provides valuable."
"The installation is easy and it takes approximately a few hours. We are deploying it from a Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) tool. All you need to do is click on it and the installation is complete."
"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."
"Security for malware and threats is the most valuable feature."
"It is very easy to configure and deploy."
"A big advantage of McAfee Endpoint Security is the ability to manage very big environments. We are supporting environments with 200,000 to 300,000 endpoints. The ability to manage with one single console is very important for us. McAfee has phenomenally improved in terms of detection. It provides real-time detection and response with the error, Real Protect, and reputations. It is not only based on signatures but also on behavior analytics, artificial intelligence, or machine learning. We have environments that never had issues with ransomware in the last 20 years. McAfee has a very good performance in this field."
"This is a good solution for antivirus and malware protection."
"Dynamic Application Containment."
"We receive good protection with this solution."
"This product has the capability to check a wide range of vulnerabilities and devices."
"Some of McAfee Endpoint Security's main features are it has benefits over normal conventional antivirus solutions because it works much faster."
"One valuable feature is Threat Prevention with the on-demand scan."
"The new central console is better than the earlier one."
 

Cons

"There is room for improvement in CPU utilization."
"The solution's stability could be better."
"The price has increased marginally recently and I would prefer if they didn't raise rates."
"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."
"The initial setup should be made easier."
"Machines with low memory and CPU may experience slow performance."
"The price of the bandwidth here is very expensive compared to European countries."
"We had experienced a crash and had to reinstall it."
"I would like this solution to do what Palo Alto traps does because I would only need to run this one product."
"We know that McAfee isn't the best antivirus and it can't protect us 100%, although we are okay with the level of protection that it gives us."
"I think it would be nice if Dynamic Application Control would come together with McAfee Endpoint Security."
"We have a lot of problems with the user experience and it's difficult to implement. MacAfee's better than the ancient anti-virus solutions but it's a little slow to resolve. Many files with malware were destroyed through the network, and MacAfee doesn't detect anything."
"I would like to see more integration with third-party products."
"Every time we open a ticket with McAfee, their response differs and they are not consistent."
"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."
"The solution has problematic encryption, which needs reforming."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is not expensive and pricing is competitive."
"The price is fair."
"The product's pricing is okay and it is yearly."
"It has very flexible licensing costs, and it's modular-based."
"We purchase the solution for three or five-year intervals. We paid approximately $150 for 10 to 15 users."
"The pricing is reasonable when I compare it to other security solutions, particularly Kaspersky, it stands out. It offers an excellent solution at a more favorable price point."
"The license is yearly."
"Its price has gone up since our last renewal. My renewal fee has gone from $517.99 in 2018 for 3 years to $739.99 when it renews this year in July. I love the product, but a price increase of over 40% is a bit exorbitant."
"Compared to Bitdefender, Trellix Endpoint Security is more expensive, but considering it comes with DLP, the solution's price is fine."
"There is a one-year and a three-year license available for this solution, we are currently on a three-year license."
"The tool is affordable"
"I would rate the cost as four to five, considering it's normal compared to other products. I find it nominal and worth the money."
"We pay 650 Rand for a license. It is a perpetual license which we normally run for two years."
"It is reasonably priced."
"McAfee's prices are flexible and can be quite competitive, although there are other solutions that are even more so."
"Licensing is paid yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
816,562 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Educational Organization
41%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security?
It is perfectly stable. We haven't received any complaints from customers regarding stability or performance. It's been smooth sailing so far.
What needs improvement with Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security?
I think it would be helpful if I could get a live console directly on the machine. Additionally, if I could run scripts on the machines to respond to any incidents, that would be a great feature.
How does McAfee Endpoint Security compare with MVISION?
The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deploy various components as desired with McAfee Endpoint Security, whereas many othe...
What do you like most about McAfee Endpoint Security?
It provides a robust defense against cybersecurity threats while offering user-friendly features like notifications and approval prompts.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Endpoint Security?
The solution is not an expensive tool. Compared to other options, it's mostly average-priced. I've deployed it for customers ranging from 100 nodes to over 5,000 nodes. Its renewal prices are very ...
 

Also Known As

Bitdefender GravityZone Security for Virtualized Environments, GravityZone Security for Virtualized Environments
McAfee Endpoint Security, McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Total Protection for Endpoint, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, MCAFEE Complete Endpoint Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SambaSafety, Morefield Communications, Northstar Ltd., Citrix, Greenman-Pedersen
inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs. Trellix Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,562 professionals have used our research since 2012.