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

Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs Intercept X Endpoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
40th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (21st)
Intercept X Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
10th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
106
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (11th), ZTNA (8th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (11th), Ransomware Protection (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Intercept X Endpoint is 1.6%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Elena Yau - PeerSpot reviewer
Prevention, in advance, saves us remediation time
We have a PHI (protected health information) committee, and some of the things that we review on a weekly basis are incidents. For example, if there was malware or adware or some kind of phishing attempt, or even ransomware, we would have to investigate and see if there was any PHI impact. We've seen small things because some kind of adware made its way through the browser from some malicious link, and it's really hard to prevent those. We're putting more levels of filtering around that. There are some product development ideas that we have been working on alongside the DI team, and they've been super helpful. There are definitely a lot more little areas of improvement for the interface. Also, we have talked with the DI team about adding the forensic piece, which is what we do a lot. That would be added value and they've just recently provided more individuals to think about the roadmap. That's part of their strategy and one of the good features that they want to bring on. Hopefully, they can bring that to fruition and that will ease our workflow a little bit more. The additional predictive and prevention capabilities in the 3.0 version, that don't require special rules and configuration, help our organization. The only caveat is that when things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background, if it is doing some kind of intervention. If we need to do some forensics, we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was. We should be able to see what instigated that trigger by DI and what exactly was done. That's a missing piece. It does a good job of preventing, but then we don't know what were the symptoms of the prevention. Let's say that there was like a PowerShell block. We'll see an indicator on the dashboard and we'll look at the logs and investigate. Sometimes we find that the logs that are captured locally on the endpoint itself are not very thorough. We were coached through our training with DI that, when troubleshooting, the DI team would always ask for the logs from the endpoint. We know what we need to do to look at something. But the logging for DI doesn't capture everything. There are some things that are missing. When it comes to root-cause analysis, or kill-chain analysis, and figuring out exactly what happened, it's very hard to do that right now on the product. I have used Carbon Black before and they're pretty good with the forensic analysis. That does save some efforts of my one engineer and myself when we have to go through the PHI committee. Right now, with Di, that feels like a blind spot. Another area for development is making the license clean-up a little bit easier. We always have to manually uninstall agents. If there were some way to remove the licensing and do better license management on the platform, that would help my team as well.
Suwandhi Suraweera - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers advanced filtering features and benefits from improved licensing and performance
There is a licensing issue with Intercept X Endpoint. Their licenses are user-based. Most of our customers use per device licenses, and they need per device licenses because they use one PC for multiple accounts. This creates a problem. There was one customer who complained about the slowness of PCs using Intercept X Endpoint. They use minor performance PCs, which causes their PCs to become slow.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has a very low false-positive ratio. That is important because it means we're not wasting time... We're able to run that entire 20,000-endpoint base with just a handful of engineers."
"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."
"The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use."
"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."
"The most valuable features are the static/dynamic analyses. Deep Instinct's predictive model has very high accuracy and provides threat information for unknown malware, such as malware classification, static analysis information, and sandbox information."
"I really like the behavioral analysis feature, because it looks at all the different things, like arbitrary shellcode and reflective DLL. It looks at a lot of things that threat actors use as threat vectors to get into the environment."
"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."
"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."
"Intercept X Endpoint is the only endpoint security product I know that provides content filtering and application controls."
"It is stable."
"It is not just a simple virus scanning product. It handles more advanced needs."
"We have found the pricing to be reasonable."
"I am impressed with the tool's common dashboard feature. The solution is also easy to deploy and manage. Reporting is also easy with the software."
"I have found the most valuable feature to be the EDR."
"The patches on offer are very helpful."
"I appreciate the ability to use the latest endpoint protection features in case of an infection or cyber threat. This is especially true when using the product with a Sophos firewall solution, like the XG series. They collaborate effectively in the event of a cyber threat."
 

Cons

"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."
"If they can bring some additional, complementary solutions, like network scanning and the like, that will help. If they had some sort of a firewall which could help detect DDoS attacks and other things, it would be an improvement"
"The interface on the endpoint could be a little more descriptive and more valuable. It doesn't always tell you the data you need to see. Improvement there would be very helpful."
"When things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background... we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"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."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
"There's an issue in the installation process where you can't install it unless you disable the built-in Windows Bitdefender antivirus. So, you have to manually disable Microsoft Bitdefender in order to install Deep Instinct. So, that makes it impossible to do a network rollout unless you manually visit each computer, which is ridiculous."
"Technical support can be improved. There could be shared support, i.e. where someone in Egypt can respond."
"Features that should be improved in the upgrade involve the excessive consumption of the the solution's processor, RAM and resources."
"There are not any solutions that are a 10 out of 10. A 10 would be perfect protection with no impact on the performance of the device. This is not the case, there is some impact on the performance of the device."
"They might want to offer an MSP model for licensing, to offer the solution as a software as a service."
"There is a licensing issue with Intercept X Endpoint; these licenses are user-based, and most of our customers require per-device licenses because they use one PC for multiple accounts, which presents a problem."
"The integration has room for improvement, especially with Mac OS."
"In my opinion, there have been significant developments in the product. In my opinion, I don’t have any suggestions as of now, however I can suggest a cost deduction which will be beneficial for all the parties. It will also relieve our budget and benefit our team."
"The Data Loss Prevention module can be better. It should also have threat hunting capabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"In comparison to the other products out there, it's exceptionally competitively priced. When you consider the lower administrative overhead that it facilitates, it's an absolute value."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"Its price is reasonable."
"Price-wise, it is good. Currently, we have a three-year plan."
"The price of this solution is a little high compared to competitors because they do not have a proper pricing structure."
"The price of Sophos Intercept X is expensive. The license is paid on an annual basis. There are extra features that can be added depending on the endpoints. The solution is priced twice as much as the Comodo solution."
"On a per-user basis, my company has to pay a certain amount of money."
"You can pay monthly, but most of our customers choose annual subscriptions because they are less expensive."
"Licensing costs are not expensive."
"Intercept X for endpoints is around $35 per user per year. The server version is $95 per server per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Deep Instinct?
The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Deep Instinct?
There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
The solution's stability is good. 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 th...
How does Crodwstrike Falcon compare with Sophos Intercept X?
I like that Crowdstrike Falcon allows me to easily correlate data between my firewalls. Its detection and machine learning are very valuable features. Crowdstrike Falcon also successfully prevents ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sophos Intercept X?
I would describe it as economical, but not much cheaper than other solutions.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Sophos Intercept X
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Flexible Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs. Intercept X Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.