No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs Trellix Intrusion Prevention System comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 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

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Intrusion Preventio...
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is 3.5%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Intrusion Prevention System is 3.1%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)3.5%
Trellix Intrusion Prevention System3.1%
Other93.4%
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer373227 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Marketing strengths shine but regaining user trust needs significant effort
There are numerous things that could be improved about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) to get it back on track. Sollution for small branches: when we have to connect a lot very small branches (or sometimes only an ATM) we need something small, with LTE and with reasonable price. Cisco response is SDWAN but it is not always the case. Recently Cisco released some small firewalls but I have not tried them yet. Central management with FMC is a very good idea, but sometimes local management or monitoring is helpfull. With Cisco You have to decide: central or local. You cannot have both. Regarding usability, when you commit configuration on Cisco, it sometimes takes very long. Commits also take some time for the competition, but Cisco is definitely lagging behind the rest in this respect. Last but not least, for me as a professional is lack of CLI. With CLI, I can configure every firewall on the market except Cisco. CLI is very important in professional working, and IMHO it was an unwise decision by Cisco to remove it. Graphical interfaces are very nice, but when you've got thousands of objects in a big installation and have to configure many things, CLI is a much faster way to do it.
BS
Large account Manager at Softcell Technologies Limited
Has offered reliable threat protection and detailed network insights but could expand features beyond existing capabilities
The best features of Trellix Intrusion Prevention System include advanced ATP (Advanced Threat Protection), which uses signatures, behavior analysis, and machine learning to stop zero-day exploits and malware advanced persistent threats (APTs). They track and collect data from APTs, which allows them to track malicious files entering the environment. The system offers inline prevention and real-time automatic blocking of malicious packets before they reach the network. It integrates with the Trellix ecosystem and provides application visibility and control. The solution provides deep insight into network traffic, applications, and protocols for better information. All packets coming through the application are analyzed and reported. They share intelligence updates regularly to protect from different malicious files and sector-specific threats. It supports both on-premise and cloud environments.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support."
"The threat detection and prevention feature is particularly important for us."
"The solution is stable. This is one of the good things in Firepower. Especially if we use ESE with it."
"Cisco support is really great; especially when you have a priority case, when everything is down, you can get an engineer in 15 minutes."
"The most valuable features of Cisco NGIPS are the VPN, IPS, access policy management, EIM, and the ASA model as part of Firepower."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its modularity, so whenever you need to upgrade or add another service, you don't need to buy another box."
"The most valuable feature would be the IPS is very important in Cisco Firepower because I can configure deep configuration in IPS and tuning."
"We have seen a return on investment in improving security and defending the threats in our network."
"The solution can scale."
"There's a good dashboard you can drill down into. It helps you easily locate intrusions and the source of attacks."
"The product is worth the investment."
"It has a lot of functions, such as firewall. We are administrators, and we create some rules to protect our network. We also monitor the traffic in and out and have disk encryption on-premises. When we detect malware, we scan for the virus on the PC. We can then delete or block the malware."
"The most valuable features are the customization of the signature and the unlimited amount of custom signatures in IPS."
"It's definitely more effective compared to the next-generation firewall that has a built-in IPS."
"Great monitoring feature."
"It improved my security by stopping an attack to the signature base, or the behavior base."
 

Cons

"We don't like its licensing model. It has separate licensing for all the features. For instance, to get URL filtering, you need to buy another license. Every feature set seems to require another license. Unless you purchase them all upfront, you find some surprises and realize that you can't do that because you need another license. Its logging isn't quite as good as it used to be in our previous solution. We used to have Cisco ASA, and we could view the logs a lot easier than NGIPS (also known as Firepower). We saw real-time logging, but we don't see that as much in Firepower."
"We would like to see improvements in the dashboard features."
"The time it takes for the product to mature, the maturity journey, the product maturity cycle, takes too long."
"Because of cybersecurity threats, other security features should be available in Cisco devices."
"Better integration with other products, such as a SIEM tool, would provide better peer visibility about your security posture."
"I have had a lot of problems with false positives and it would be helpful if this were improved."
"This solution is not easily scaled."
"The cost of adding additional throughput is very high and is an area of concern."
"Some of the documentation is not as straightforward as it could be. It's much too general - especially in areas related to updates."
"I haven't seen threat intelligence and machine learning for predictive threat analysis in the Trellix Intrusion Prevention System yet."
"In terms of high-security attacks, not all of them are developed. You cannot do a rule that includes all high severities."
"The Network Security Managers could be more stable, agile, and work faster. When it comes to instability, there is room for improvement."
"Integration with Global Thereat Intelligence could be better. Also, I think management solutions are end of life now at McAfee. Network threat analyzer may be used for endpoint quarantines. Integration between these sides, as well as endpoint APO, will help you quarantine the risky endpoints."
"The management component could be simplified."
"The pricing could be improved."
"The system isn't fool-proof. Sometimes, based on the network or other reasons, McAfee cannot detect the actual attack."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing fees for this solution are $3,500 USD, and there are no additional costs."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
"Cisco products are always expensive, but if you can afford the price then it's a great solution."
"This is an expensive product, with the biggest cost being the license that keeps the service going."
"There is a license required to use Cisco NGIPS and it can be a one or three-year license."
"They are very expensive in some places and not reasonable at times for many customers. I have had customers choose another solution because of the high price."
"This is a very affordable product."
"There are licensing fees depending on the features that you are using."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"The tool is competitively priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise17
Large Enterprise26
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco NGIPS?
I would rate the price for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) as high.
What needs improvement with Cisco NGIPS?
I am aware that we are not measuring some metrics or tracking access through Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS). In my opinion, Cisco could improve the Web GUI for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS).
What is your primary use case for Cisco NGIPS?
Our main use case for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is in-line traffic control, and we are using IPS in an in-line mode.
What needs improvement with McAfee Network Security Platform?
Trellix Intrusion Prevention System does not provide virtual patching. Patching involves updates on the OS side to address vulnerabilities, which is a different functionality. Trellix Intrusion Pre...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Network Security Platform?
We do not use Trellix Intrusion Prevention System; rather, we sell the Trellix Intrusion Prevention System solution. The typical use case for our clients is to find out what vulnerable files exist....
What advice do you have for others considering McAfee Network Security Platform?
I have experience working with other tools, specifically Trellix solutions such as DLP, EDR, and MDR, as well as with other Imperva tools. My team has worked with Trellix Intrusion Prevention Syste...
 

Also Known As

Sourcefire NGIPS, Firepower NGIPS
McAfee Network Security Platform, McAfee NSP, IntruShield Network Intrusion Prevention System, IntruShield Network IPS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

American Electric Power, Huntington Bank, Keycorp, Nationwide, Transunion, Marriott, Inova Health, Ford, Thomson Reuters, Dow Chemical, Equifax, Chevron, Walmart, Coca Cola
Desjardins Group, HollyFrontier, Nubia, Agbar, WNS Global Services, INAIL, Universidad de Las Américas Puebla (UDLAP), Cook County, China Pacific Insurance, Bank Central Asia, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, City of Chicago, Macquarie Telecom, Sutherland Global Services, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, United Automotive Electronic Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs. Trellix Intrusion Prevention System and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.