Intune vs Tanium vs Automox: the cost of patching 2,000 endpoints on a schedule

The decision is a licence question before it is a patching question

Patching 2,000 endpoints is priced per device by all three products, but only one of them is already inside a contract most of these estates hold. Microsoft sells Intune on its own or as part of Microsoft 365 plans, and the page lists Intune among the components of those plans alongside Entra ID, Defender and Purview. For a team already on a plan that includes it, the marginal cost of the patch layer is not a new per-device line at all.

That changes what the other two have to prove. Tanium and Automox are bought to do something the bundled tool does not, and the buyer's job this quarter is to name that thing before the renewal date rather than after. The pages reviewed give the mechanism for each and the billing mechanics for one of them, and they leave the per-device rate unpublished for both specialists.

The estate shape matters as much as the count. Intune's page describes management across Windows, macOS, iOS and Android from one console, with automated provisioning, remote configuration and remote wipe for lost or stolen devices. A 2,000-endpoint estate that is mostly Windows and already enrolled is a different purchase from one carrying a large macOS and Linux server population.

What each product actually does to a patch cycle

Intune's mechanism is policy and enrolment. The page describes streamlining policy enforcement, patching and reporting while monitoring the health, compliance and security status of cloud-connected endpoints, and it states that the latest security patches keep devices compliant with no manual work. Provisioning is automated so a device arrives with apps and settings ready on first use, and Mobile Application Management secures corporate apps on personal devices without full enrolment.

Tanium's mechanism is the agent and the query. The company describes a single lightweight agent with a patented linear chain architecture that queries endpoints peer-to-peer, returning answers in seconds with reduced network overhead, and it states that live queries run across every endpoint with no stale scans and no sampling. Patching, configuration, deployment, isolation and remediation sit in the same console, and the vendor positions this against estates running five to seven endpoint tools that do not share data.

Automox's mechanism is scheduled automation across operating systems and third-party software. The page states that the platform automates patch management across Windows, macOS, Linux and third-party software including Adobe, Java, Firefox, Chrome and Windows, works across computers and servers, and is built for remote workforces. It describes the range from set-and-forget automation to full scheduling and workflow control, and it sells add-on modules on top of a core plan, including remote access to Windows and macOS endpoints for diagnosis and repair.

The practical difference for a 2,000-seat team is where the schedule lives. Intune ties patching to compliance policy and the identity controls around it; Tanium ties it to a live query against the fleet; Automox ties it to a maintenance window you configure. All three can hold a monthly cadence. Only one of them is already paid for on many of these estates.

Where the specialists break on price

Neither Tanium nor Automox publishes a per-device rate on the pages reviewed, and that absence is the finding rather than a gap to be filled. A buyer costing 2,000 seats has to ask both vendors for the per-endpoint rate at that count, the term options, and what happens to the rate when the estate grows past the subscribed number. Automox at least states its billing rules, which is more than most patch vendors put on a pricing page.

Automox charges upfront for the endpoints subscribed at the per-endpoint rate, and each endpoint added above the subscription is billed at the same rate annualised and prorated for the rest of the term. The company encourages subscribers to buy the number of endpoints they plan to use for predictability, which is the honest way of saying that seat drift is where the invoice moves. Monthly pay-for-use carries no commitment; the annual plan is stated to save 25%.

Volume discounts are stated as available for 200+ device licences or multi-year contracts, so a 2,000-seat buyer should treat the list rate as a starting point and ask for the discounted rate in writing. Tanium's page carries no pricing at all, and its comparison table lists OT and IoT endpoint visibility as an add-on, which is the kind of line that changes a quote after the first call.

The compliance and reporting side is not free either

Patching is auditable work, and the reporting layer is where the three diverge on paper. Intune's page describes monitoring the health, compliance and security status of cloud-connected endpoints and enforcing device compliance as part of a Zero Trust posture, which means the evidence an auditor asks for is generated by the same console that pushed the patch. For a team already running Entra ID and Defender, that is one fewer system to reconcile at review time.

Automox lists its certifications on the pricing page: SOC 2, SOC 3, TX-RAMP Level 2, CSA STAR, GDPR, EU-US DPF and PCI-DSS, with SSO, MFA and RBAC included at no stated extra cost. A procurement team that has to clear a security questionnaire before signing will find that list useful, and it is the sort of thing to ask Tanium for in the same format rather than assume.

Tanium's page makes its case on consolidation and speed rather than on certification. It states that the platform delivers real-time visibility, patching, compliance and threat detection from one agent, and that its peer-to-peer distribution scales to millions of endpoints. For a 2,000-seat estate the scale claim is not the reason to buy; the reason would be a query requirement the other two cannot meet, such as asking a question of every endpoint and getting an answer in seconds.

What to put in front of each vendor

For Intune, the question is which plan the estate already holds and what the per-user uplift is if it does not. The page states that Intune is available on its own or as part of Microsoft 365 plans, and that prices may vary based on the Microsoft agreement, so the number to ask for is the per-user rate on the current agreement at the estate's actual seat count, not the published list.

For Automox, the question is the per-endpoint rate at 2,000 devices after the volume discount, the annual term price against twelve monthly payments, and the treatment of endpoints added mid-term. The page answers the last one already: same rate, annualised, prorated. Ask for the first two in writing, because the page does not carry them.

For Tanium, the question is the per-endpoint rate at 2,000, what the core platform includes before modules are added, and whether OT or IoT visibility is in scope, since the vendor's own comparison lists it as an add-on. Ask also for the certification list in the format Automox publishes, because the page reviewed does not carry one. A vendor that cannot produce either document before the renewal date has answered the question.

The decision rule

Choose Intune if the estate already holds a Microsoft 365 plan that includes it and the endpoint population is predominantly Windows, macOS, iOS and Android, because the patch layer then arrives inside a contract you are paying for and the compliance evidence comes from the same console. Choose Automox if you need scheduled third-party patching across Windows, macOS and Linux with published billing rules and a certification list your procurement team can clear, and you are willing to ask for the per-endpoint rate at 2,000 seats before you sign.

Choose Tanium if the requirement is a live query against every endpoint with no sampling and a single agent replacing a stack of five to seven tools, and the estate is large enough that peer-to-peer distribution changes what the WAN carries. Wait if none of the three can put a per-device number at 2,000 seats in front of you before the renewal date, because a patch contract priced on an unpublished rate is a budget you cannot defend.