How does Microsoft Sentinel differ from traditional SIEM?
Here’s a side-by-side comparison of the differences between Microsoft Sentinel and traditional SIEM solutions.
| Feature | Microsoft Sentinel | Traditional SIEM |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment | Cloud-native (built on Azure). | On-premises or hybrid. |
| Scalability | Auto-scales with data volume and users. | Requires manual hardware or license upgrades. |
| Setup & Maintenance | Minimal setup; no infrastructure to manage. | High setup and ongoing maintenance costs. |
| Integration | Seamless with Microsoft 365, Azure, Defender, and third-party tools. | Often requires manual connectors and integrations. |
| Cost Model | Pay-as-you-go based on data ingestion. | Typically fixed or tiered licensing with high upfront cost. |
| Artificial Intelligence | Built-in AI/ML for automated threat detection and correlation. | Often limited or requires separate modules. |
| Automation | Native SOAR via Logic Apps and playbooks. | Requires third-party tools or custom scripting. |
| Updates & Upgrades | Continuous updates via Azure platform. | Periodic manual upgrades needed. |
| Multi-Cloud Support | Supports Azure, AWS, GCP, and hybrid environments. | Typically fixed or tiered licensing with high upfront cost. |
| Time to Value | Fast to deploy and derive insights. | Slower setup; longer time to operationalise. |
In simple terms:
- Sentinel is cloud-first, smarter, and faster to deploy—ideal for modern, hybrid, or cloud-native environments.
- Traditional SIEMs are infrastructure-heavy and often slower to adapt to evolving threats.