Cisco Secure Endpoint (formerly Cisco AMP) vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (formerly Microsoft Defender ATP)

• Identifies malware, malicious processes/services and other events well
• Great automated actions features such as host isolation
• Detailed threat visibility such as file trajectory
• Integration with other Cisco suite of security products
• Great value
• Low false positive rate
• Lightweight agent
• Variety of reporting
• Stable agent

Read full review

• It is great at proactively monitoring threats across the network. It works seamlessly with the client to monitor individual user computers, and it has a good real-time scanning engine.
• On the client side, Windows Defender doesn't require a whole lot of system resources to run, nor will it create unnessary slowdowns of a computer, even while scanning for threats

Read full review

• Event search function. The searching is very limited and allows for poor filtering choices.
• Slowness. The web GUI is far slower than most Cisco products.
• Sync issues. When attempting to move a device from one group to another or start isolation on a device, there is a sizable delay in communication with the device that can cause operations to fail.

Read full review

• Virus detection rates are below competitors.
• Too many notifications that end up bothering.
• Do not ask every time if you should send reports to Microsoft.

Read full review

• AMP has been able to catch some serious infections and stop them from doing huge damage in our environment.
• The overall cost of AMP vs the cost of not having this protection and getting hit with malware, or other nefarious damage to your environment is well worth the money.

Read full review

• There is definitely a piece of mind provided when you know that your system will not get compromised because of malware and viruses.
• The fact that I don't have to spend money in the first place means that I can spend money on other more important things that do require it.

Read full review