We performed a comparison between Tenable Nessus and Tenable SC based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Tenable SC is the winner in this comparison. Tenable SC received higher marks for its support than Tenable Nessus did. In addition, its users feel that it is the more reasonably priced solution.
"The reports are pretty nice and easy to understand."
"It allows me to prioritize efforts and utilize effective technical resources."
"It gives you an unlimited IP scan."
"The most valuable feature of Tenable Nessus is the support it provides for any new vulnerabilities quickly."
"The most valuable feature is how it scanned and detected through its database to let us know exactly what fixes we needed to put in place for the vulnerabilities. It detects and it also gives you the way to fix it."
"It provides multiple recommendations towards the remedy of vulnerabilities."
"Among the most valuable features are scanning for vulnerabilities and the reporting. The reporting templates are okay. I like that I can see all the hosts with different vulnerabilities."
"I have experience with it on my attack stations, and it's pretty good to optimize. Personally, I think Nessus is quite a good product."
"It basically reviews our threat landscape vulnerability."
"Tenable.sc's best features are the availability model, accident management, and scoring."
"I think that this is a good solution for evaluating vulnerability in the network."
"One of the most valuable features is their distributed scan model for allotting engines to work together as a pool and handle multiple scans at once, across multiple environments. Automatic scanning distribution is a distinguishing feature of their toolset."
"The most valuable features of Tenable SC are the reports and the dashboards."
"The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view to create a new dashboard, and it works out very well for our needs."
"The initial setup process is simple."
"It is a very good and user-friendly product."
"There is room for improvement in finishing the transition to the cloud. We'd like to see them keep on improving the Tenable.io product, so that we can migrate to it entirely, instead of having to keep the Tenable.sc on-prem product."
"One area that has room for improvement is the reporting. I'm preparing reports for Windows and Linux machines, etc. Currently, I'm collecting three or four reports and turning them into one report. I don't know if it is possible to combine all of them in one report, but that would be helpful."
"I have found it is sometimes difficult to control the Zoom meeting sessions. For example, it is difficult to know who is talking and when trying to mute everyone but the speaker you end up muting everyone. When using multiple screens it is laborious to find the control buttons, such as to start a session. Additionally, when a recording is done I have found it difficult to find them, there should be an easier way to retrieve them."
"Remediation needs improvement."
"Tenable Nessus could improve reporting and information sharing. It would be helpful if we could share the reports and have a little bit better flexibility in the reporting of the data."
"Consumes more system resources when it's running."
"The price could be reduced."
"The reports are okay, but the interface is a bit difficult to navigate in some cases."
"The solution needs to improve its support. I would like to see a bird's eye view of my network architecture. I would also like to see the continuous view feature in the tool."
"The biggest issue I have with the solution is when I'm using the scanning it picks up the original DNS of that device. That means, before we image it and actually change the DNS to something within our company structure, it'll just be random numbers and letters and Tenable will stick to that DNS for a long time."
"Tenable's reporting engine needs improvement. It needs to be more efficient and add more features."
"The vulnerability scan does not work correctly until the access privileges are set by the system administrator."
"Its reporting can be improved. It is not easy to generate a scan report the way we want. The data is okay, but we can't easily change the template to make it look the way we want."
"For downloading reports, we have to go to the scan and then we have to go to the reports and download the Excel or CSV or PDF. I think these menus and clicks can be minimized."
"The pricing is reasonable, but this could be brought down more aggressively, such as we see with Rapid7, Tenable SC's main competitor."
"The solution's user interface has some issues."
Tenable Nessus is ranked 3rd in Vulnerability Management with 75 reviews while Tenable Security Center is ranked 1st in Vulnerability Management with 48 reviews. Tenable Nessus is rated 8.4, while Tenable Security Center is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Tenable Nessus writes "Unlimited assets for one price and quick, agentless results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Security Center writes "A security solution for vulnerability assessment with automated scans". Tenable Nessus is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Management, Pentera and Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, whereas Tenable Security Center is most compared with Tenable Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Horizon3.ai and Tanium. See our Tenable Nessus vs. Tenable Security Center report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management 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.