Two of fourteen models named Fortinet OT Security Platform first on the direct prompt; one named Armis Centrix. Fortinet OT Security Platform was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Armis Centrix by fourteen and Fortinet OT Security Platform carries 23 labels and Armis Centrix 31, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the OT and IoT security page.
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Fortinet OT Security Platform and Armis Centrix were named in the same answer thirty-two times, of the 67 answers naming Fortinet OT Security Platform and the 106 naming Armis Centrix. In those answers Armis Centrix took the first choice one time and Fortinet OT Security Platform two.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | ||||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | ||||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | ||||||
| Perplexity Sonar | ||||||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | ||||||
| Mistral Small | ||||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | ||||||
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | ||||||
| Kimi K2 | ||||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | ||||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | ||||||
| GPT-6 Luna | ||||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B |
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“may be better evaluated as infrastructure/security-control platforms than as best-in-class OT-native monitors” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Microsoft Defender for IoT (if you are a Microsoft shop) or Fortinet (if you use their network hardware) are the most successful starting points” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
“Fortinet offers a cost-effective entry point with OT appliances starting at $2,200-$4,000” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Start with Fortinet for network-based protection and segmentation” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Example Platforms to approach with caution: Armis Centrix (or similar integration-heavy IT/IoT platforms)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Strong on IoT/XIoT discovery but weaker on deep OT protocol knowledge vs. natives like Dragos/Nozomi.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“not the same as deep OT-native detection; they may be better suited to IoT visibility” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“I'd recommend Armis as the primary choice due to its balance of comprehensive device discovery, ease of implementation, and vendor compatibility” Claude Haiku 4.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“You should only choose Agentless (passive monitoring) platforms like Claroty, Nozomi, or Armis for OT.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · first choice
“start with Claroty xDome or Armis” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · first choice
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.