Bitdefender GravityZone combines multiple security services into a single platform to reduce the cost of building a trusted environment for endpoints.
$149
per month 5 devices (minimum)
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
Kaspersky Small Office Security (formerly Kaspersky Work Space Security) is antivirus / endpoint security software from Russian company Kaspersky.
$29.99
per month
Windows Server
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
N/A
N/A
Pricing
Bitdefender GravityZone
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Windows Server
Editions & Modules
GravityZone Small Business Security
$284.99
per year 10 devices
GravityZone Business Security
$369.99
per year 10 devices
GravityZone Business Security Premium
$814.99
per year 10 devices
GravityZone Business Security Premium
Contact Sales
GravityZone Business Security Enterprise
Contact Sales
GravityZone XDR
Contact Sales
Essential Suite
$29.99
per month
Advanced Suite
$39.99
per month
Premium Suite
$44.99
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Bitdefender GravityZone
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Windows Server
Free Trial
Yes
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
5 device license purchase minimum. Discounts available for multi-year subscriptions. 1st year discounts available (up to 30% off displayed price).
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Bitdefender GravityZone
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Windows Server
Considered Multiple Products
Bitdefender GravityZone
Verified User
Administrator
Chose Bitdefender GravityZone
We switched from Kaspersky Endpoint Security to BitDefender, due to public perception, monthly pricing model and centralized management across multi-tenant. We then switched from BitDefender to Webroot as this product had the same features as BitDefender as well as better Apple …
Bitdefender offered the largest number of tools with the smallest footprint of any providers we have tested and used. The cloud platform is very well thought out and will give us all the information we need very quickly. Resources required have been greatly reduced, both on …
It's night and day between Kaspersky and Bitdefender [GravityZone]. We previously used Kaspersky both internally and throughout our customer base. It was a resource hog and allowed many threats to get through. It never updated properly and was in my opinion, a piece of junk. …
We tested many different antivirus programs before deciding to go with Bitdefender GravityZone. Bitdefender [GravityZone] caught numerous threats that made it through the other AVs. It also uses considerably fewer system resources than its competitors.
We were a Kaspersky shop for years. Kaspersky was a resource hog and it didn't even block half of what was thrown at it. We had more outbreaks and more end-user complaints in a year of Kaspersky then we have had in almost three years of Bitdefender.
Norton and Symantec seemed to attract every hacker and spammer in our opinion. Kaspersky was difficult to manage thru the cloud access. All 3 of these products used a large portion of the computer resources and had many of our users locked up during scans. We always seemed to …
I believe it’s pretty effective compared to others. Bitdefender GravityZone does have robust protection. Having used Carbon Black and Kaspersky, all solutions are pretty reliable and top tier.
We have looked at Kaspersky several times but have always decided the client to heavy and management was cumbersome at best. We used Avast Business Antivirus for about 5 years primarily because it was free for education and we had ESET before that. Overall Bitdefender is easier …
I've used the cloud version of CarbonBlack and Bitdefender. They both say they automatically scan files as soon as they appear on your computer. The user/administrator is left to trust that the technology works. With Bitdefender, it at least allows an on-demand scan, but it …
System Center is more robust than Kaspersky Security Center. They both offer a single pane of glass for remote management of Endpoints (at the Advanced level for Kaspersky). Kaspersky does an excellent job of providing 3rd party applications in packages that can be downloaded …
Bitdefender had been a great replacement for our previous product - it was painless to make the switch with very few issues. We tested in a VM lab a few different offerings, but Bitdefender was the one that covered everything we required at the time and allowed us to be able to expand the offering simply.
I think Kaspersky is well suited for large and small companies. Larger companies can take advantage of the KSC (Kaspersky Security Center) servers to help manage a large network. The KSC has many good features to help monitor the health of the organization. It does a good job with updating and deploying remotely. It has inventory features, and can even deploy non-Kaspersky software packages uploaded to the center. KSC can become a source of good information about [your] network that can be seen at a glance. IT departments are normally smaller than they need to be. KSC helps with larger and smaller companies because of this. A small company would appreciate the amount of information and management that can be done through KSC without needing extra help. If the company is small enough that they don't have servers on-site, there is a cloud version. I have not used that to know how it differs from the local KSC.
Windows Server and Active Directory is very robust and stable, it has been a staple in every IT environment I have worked in during my career. Junior to Intermediate admins can learn Windows Server easily, the user interfaces make administration tasks very easy as well as the documentation available through a vast amount of resources. There are other Operating Systems available with no GUI which has a smaller attack surface, faster update installation and reboot time. Windows Server does have the ability to remove the desktop experience, however it is not something I have had experience with and I believe most administrators choose not to remove it.
Once installed, Bitdefender [GravityZone] runs silently in the background with little to no need for user interaction.
The cloud-based console provides for easy computer management and deployment.
Bitdefender [GravityZone] is extremely flexible, with a policy-based system wherein different profiles can be created (i.e. a policy to deactivate the firewall, a policy to allow for admin control on a machine, etc.) and pushed out to individual computers.
Computers can be grouped into different categories, with different policies automatically deployed to each category.
Bitdefender [GravityZone] is relatively resource-light and runs well even on lower-end computers.
The Security Center is laid out very well and makes it easy to install and manage the client endpoint protection on servers and workstations.
The way security policies are defined and managed is very easy to understand.
The client programs seem to be lighter and smaller on the client systems than others I have used in the past. Using fewer resources is always an advantage.
Who do I ask? This is my chief complaint is once the initial licenses were purchased through Bit Defender, there was no one to contact that could help navigate some of the initial questions I had with regard to specific policies to implement for our file server. The parent web site is, well, hard to navigate when one is trying to "learn" the system.
The second issue is in increasing the licenses. It took several days for the parent company (by contact and phone) to inform me that they could not increase the licenses and I would have to go through a private vendor. There was no intent to connect me to a vendor or provide a vendor list until I asked specifically. YET I continue to get email from the parent company reminding me to pay an annual fee for the licenses purchase through the private vendor. The parent company can see the number of licenses yet did not sell them to me.
Gravity Zone Dashboard, while excellent for those who have experience, is not particularly intuitive for those who have never used it. There does not seem to be a lot of documentation for those responsible for implementation.
Microsoft needs to minimize the update frequency by making the product more secure. It can become very exhausting trying to keep updated if you don't have a dedicated support team. It can become challenging where the business is unable to allow downtime for reboots as part of the update process.
Prone to security and audit vulnerabilities.
The operating system needs more CPU and memory resources compared to other options such as Linux.
Understanding the licensing model can be abit confusing.
Comes with a standard firewall, but not the most secured one available. Would suggest using a more secured firewall as part of your antivirus software.
Due to the number of vulnerabilities and the operating system being a target for hackers, anti-virus software is a must.
It works. I rely heavily on my vendors to provide a product that works, is easy to implement, and that they support. As well as be a decent value for the money
The product is stable and accurate in detecting security threats. There are very few or no false positives in detecting security threats or unusual behavior and has very sharp heuristics. The product does the job very well including saving us money in getting 3rd party patch management tools as the business is already using Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager which is Microsoft product specific and the product patches these third party products e.g Adobe Flash Player
I've carefully reviewed the servers and services currently running on Windows Server 2012, and given the opportunity would renew them as is going forward. There are two systems I currently have in place, one is a very large Linux implementation for a large ecommerce site, and one is a very large backup solution front ended by FTP servers running Linux. Neither are well suited for Windows, but the overall network infrastructure is and will be Windows Server for the foreseeable future.
On the whole I find the product very easy to use but some features need me to do some digging about in the console menus to find everything. I think if the interface used a bit less jargon and more clear plain language, it would be easier to find how to do things within the console.
I will give Kaspersky a score of 9 out of 10 for scalability, as it allows businesses to easily expand their security infrastructure. This means it won't cost them a lot to add further protection and security. It won't also require them to purchase other hardware and services for their required protection.
Anyone new to IT could easily use the familiar Desktop Experience (GUI) version because we all know how to use Windows, whether a client or server version. Once an IT user is more comfortable with the operating system, they can move on to the Core version, which is the way to go in almost all situations.
Yes its very available. The software continues to protect you even if you are offline. It constantly runs in the background and will check for updates again once back online.
I've used the on-premise server. I've only experienced one time that we couldn't open the console, and that was a server issue. It seems to be a dependable solution. It's there, and it's stable.
The console is quite fast and responsive, and once you start to get used to it, it is easy to use and you can see the main dashboard status at a glance. You can then dig deeper into the individual Companies / Endpoint clients and check the status of each. The software itself is not heavy on system resources in each PC.
Users don't notice any slowdown with the antivirus running on their systems. There have been issues when the systems have missed a scheduled scan, and it was checked to run at [a] first available time, they will start a full scan at startup. This has caused some lag. Normally there are also some issues with the workstation, but it is something to note.
Support is an area Bitdefender has always struggled with. While their products work great, the GravityZone dashboard is very technical in nature. If you aren't IT inclined, it could be difficult to setup. While most times support is helpful, we tend to work with them over email because of their very thick accent, they are hard to understand over the phone.
I give the maximum grade because we have no complaints; we never had any failure, serious error, and serious threat to the company. All of its features work very well. The great advantage of having a product supported by an industry-leading security company is that regularly updated security protocols will protect the system against all emerging threats.
Microsoft's support is hugely wide-ranging from articles online to having to contact them directly for the more serious issues. In recent years when I have contacted them directly, I have found the support o be excellent as I have found myself connected to very knowledgeable people in the field in which I needed the support. The online support available is vast and I tend to find most of the time that there is always someone out there who has had the same issue as me in the past and knows something about how to resolve it! This is the advantage of using industry standard and long-established systems such as Windows Server.
The trainer went through everything in the console an showed me what each setting did. If I had any questions on how to do something, he showed me where to go and how to do it. The trainer was very helpful and knowledgeable, and also professional and patient. Highly recommended.
The trainer went through everything in the console an showed me what each setting did. If I had any questions on how to do something, he showed me where to go and how to do it. The trainer was very helpful and knowledgeable, and also professional and patient. Highly recommended.
Make sure to provide awareness campaigns on changes that will be implemented and WHY the business is doing it and the benefits reaped. Benefits reaped is very important for the justification of why things have to change and emphasizing the importance of security. This will reduce user disgruntlement and total bitterness on use of their workstation or laptop
Make sure that you have detailed processes in place for every server instance you plan to install/upgrade, if possible get the base OS loaded and Windows Updates applied ahead of time, and if using a VM take a snapshot prior to installing each role, as well as along the way.
We were a Kaspersky shop for years. Kaspersky was a resource hog and it didn't even block half of what was thrown at it. We had more outbreaks and more end-user complaints in a year of Kaspersky then we have had in almost three years of Bitdefender.
Kaspersky is a leader in endpoint protection, but its ties to potential adversaries are unsettling. Kaspersky has a great threat research team and quickly identifies malicious software and its signature. Its web-based protection is also top notch. This is a great product but as with everything has its place.
They are different experiences, and while the other solutions offer enterprise-grade stability and, in some cases, address Windows server shortcomings (such as patching), they all do the trick, but the other solutions require a deeper technical background/configuration of items at the command line, which some people are not fully comfortable with.
I give it this rating because one you have the console running, you can add or remove whole companies, add computer endpoints (and remove them), and easily create and deploy endpoint packages to the machines that need the software. Once installed, the software starts to report back to the Bitdefender servers and the number of active licences is then seen and billed.
You can create groups and create different policies for each group. You can customize many parts of the software before it is deployed. You can create different tasks and schedules based on the groups. It is customizable.
The ROI for Bitdefender is hard to quantify except that it requires very little maintenance time from our staff.
We've spent no time troubleshooting user complaints or issues from users, so it has been a big time-saver over our previously used anti-malware software.
Bitdefender's customer service is usually pretty good and also very responsive, so I don't have to wait by the phone or to keep checking email to resolve a problem--although our issues have been mostly informational and not a problem with functionality.
