We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

McAfee Endpoint Security vs Symantec End-User Endpoint Security comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about McAfee Endpoint Security vs. Symantec End-User Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
563,208 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations.""The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems.""The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it.""It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it.""Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us.""If somebody has been compromised, the question always is: How has it affected other devices in the network? Cisco AMP gives you a very neat view of that.""The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.""The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pros →

"The product is quite user-friendly.""Threat prevention is valuable because most clients use other solutions like antivirus as part of web protection. I don't find that kind of solution useful.""The package of protection that it provides is useful. It has antivirus, malware protection, VPN, and a whole bunch of other features.""What I like best is the integrated end-to-end security that works with the security information and events manager.""There is a new feature where you can set thresholds for all the CPU consumption allowing for no consumption on the servers when the scans happen. It is a separate plugin or addon, and if we have it on all the virtual machines it automatically checks the resources, and based on that, it will schedule the scans. That is something that I have not seen in other antivirus solutions, such as Symantec.""I have found many of the features to be useful.""The solution offers very good endpoint security.""It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment."

More McAfee Endpoint Security Pros →

"The firewall, IPS and device control are useful at protecting the environment.""Their threat protection is very good. We are managing a good number of users thanks to the solution and we are pretty satisfied with it.""The product has been quite stable.""The valuable features are device control, SONOR, and anti-virus.""The solution can scale.""One of the features is the ability to frequently get virus signature updates.""The solution detects malware very well.""The features are very nice. We are getting updates continuously from the Symantec side regarding any attacks, such as zero-day attacks. Symantec helps us in mitigating any attacks or threats early."

More Symantec End-User Endpoint Security Pros →

Cons
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time.""The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications.""...the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal.""Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that.""We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way.""The GUI needs improvement, it's not good.""The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on.""We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons →

"It would be helpful if the controlling of connections coming to the PC could be done from McAfee's side so that we can block those connections.""I would like this solution to do what Palo Alto traps does because I would only need to run this one product.""We have had some of our clients not happy with McAfee Endpoint Security because it blocks some of the applications they are trying to use. They should make it easier to unblock applications.""The vendor should simplify the way they bundle the products because it's very hard to explain to customers what products contain which features.""The software download features could stand improvement.""The solution has problematic encryption, which needs reforming.""It didn't work well for some of the use cases. We have different use cases for each entity. Their support is also not good and needs improvement.""With McAfee, if there is a zero-day vulnerability, you have to download the patch for it from the McAfee website, then apply it to your endpoint."

More McAfee Endpoint Security Cons →

"It can maybe send notifications when there is an update and everything is successful.""The support needs to be better. When we upgrade, we can run into issues, and it's hard to get the help we require.""The monitoring capabilities could be further developed.""The solution could be more secure and scalable.""There is room for improvement in the zero-day threat detection system.""Future releases should ideally be cheaper.""Difficult to set up on older systems.""The reporting could be improved."

More Symantec End-User Endpoint Security Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
  • "Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc."
  • "In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
  • "Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection."
  • "There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
  • "The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
  • "We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."
  • "The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
  • More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Pricing is reasonable and runs at a cost per user per year."
  • "It is not that expensive. There is no additional cost. We got the entire bundle together."
  • "The price of this product is good."
  • "The price of McAfee is pretty similar to Symantec, and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
  • "Its price is very high. It is higher than its competitors, and it should be less."
  • "The pricing is great and licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis."
  • "Since the maintenance is done by our own team, the price of the subscription should really be cheaper."
  • "We pay 650 Rand for a license. It is a perpetual license which we normally run for two years."
  • More McAfee Endpoint Security Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "We pay our licensing fees on a yearly basis, and everything is included in that price."
  • "Its price should be reasonable."
  • "There are subscription costs, we typically purchase the annual subscription. There can be other expenses too, for example, we use CrowdStrike also as part of our policy."
  • "The prices fluctuate, but this year I think it was maybe around $12,000."
  • "The EDR options are costlier than other products."
  • "Licensing is based on a yearly subscription."
  • "Symantec is expensive."
  • "Its price is reasonable."
  • More Symantec End-User Endpoint Security Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
    563,208 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.
    Top Answer: 
    Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.
    Top Answer: 
    The GUI needs improvement, it's not good. There are false positives in emails. At times, the emails are blocked and… more »
    Top Answer: 
    The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deploy… more »
    Top Answer: 
    Would benefit with the addition of DLP features.
    Top Answer: 
    I believe their prices are very good. Our customers pay an annual license fee.
    Top Answer: 
    Aqua Security is easy to use and very manageable. Its main focus is on Kubernetes and Docker. Security is a very… more »
    Top Answer: 
    We use Symantec because we do not use MS Enterprise products, but in my opinion, Microsoft Defender is a superior… more »
    Top Answer: 
    Protection from viruses, malware, Trojans, and malicious files is most valuable. It is also good in terms of application… more »
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Cisco AMP for Endpoints
    McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Total Protection for Endpoint, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, MCAFEE Complete Endpoint Protection
    Symantec EPP, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP)
    Learn More
    Overview

    Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.

    McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection allows you to protect all of your devices with intelligent, collaborative security, in one easy-to-manage, integrated solution. Our integrated endpoint security framework helps remove redundancies, enables fast, proven performance and offers an architecture to align both current and future security investments. With a flexible choice of cloud-based or a local management console, security administrators also get true centralized management that simplifies ongoing tasks, deployment and monitoring.

    Unmatched Endpoint Safety for Your OrganizationAs an on-premises, hybrid, or cloud-based solution, the single-agent Symantec platform protects all your traditional and mobile endpoint devices, and uses artificial intelligence (AI) to optimize security decisions.

    Offer
    Learn more about Cisco Secure Endpoint
    Learn more about McAfee Endpoint Security
    Learn more about Symantec End-User Endpoint Security
    Sample Customers
    Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
    inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
    Audio Visual Dynamics, Red Deer Advocate, Asia Pacific Telecom Co. Ltd., Kibbutz Ein Gedi, and AMETEK, Inc.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Government13%
    University7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Comms Service Provider24%
    Computer Software Company23%
    Government7%
    Financial Services Firm5%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm26%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Government13%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company28%
    Comms Service Provider21%
    Government8%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm12%
    Pharma/Biotech Company8%
    University7%
    Computer Software Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company24%
    Comms Service Provider22%
    Government7%
    Financial Services Firm4%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business39%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business28%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise50%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business38%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise41%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business37%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise37%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business41%
    Midsize Enterprise22%
    Large Enterprise38%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business43%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise43%
    Find out what your peers are saying about McAfee Endpoint Security vs. Symantec End-User Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
    563,208 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    McAfee Endpoint Security is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 39 reviews while Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is ranked 6th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 57 reviews. McAfee Endpoint Security is rated 8.0, while Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of McAfee Endpoint Security writes "Protect your business against a wide variety of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec End-User Endpoint Security writes "Lacks next-generation behaviour-based detection, offers terrible technical support, and not as robust as competitors". McAfee Endpoint Security is most compared with McAfee MVISION Endpoint, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Trend Micro Deep Security, whereas Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trend Micro Deep Security, CrowdStrike Falcon and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response. See our McAfee Endpoint Security vs. Symantec End-User Endpoint Security report.

    See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.

    We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (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.