We performed a comparison between Check Point IPS and Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The possibility of customizing the rules is great."
"There's an automatic update after every 2 hours which makes sure that the database is up to date and providing zero-day vulnerability protection."
"The Check Point IPS module allows me granularity in creating rules."
"It is also worth noting that many IPS signature comes with detailed background about the vulnerability, and potentially how the vulnerability would affect the network security."
"The solution's IPS functionality and firewall functionality are the solution's most valuable features."
"Among its great features is the ability to detect outgoing malware or extraction of compromised data and stop it, thus safeguarding us by isolating the network, the equipment, or the identity of the affected users."
"The autonomous threat prevention is very easy to use. The APIs and SmartConsole tool also work well."
"It offers robust protection with features such as Next Generation firewall capabilities, mobile solutions, and proactive threat prevention."
"It's very easy to use and configure. What is nice about Palo Alto is that even if you don't understand how to use it, you can just click on upload and upload everything that needs to be blocked."
"The sandboxing tools offer great prevention for cloud feeds."
"One of the most valuable features is the anti-malware protection."
"I like the solution's interface."
"The stability of Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is good."
"We are currently using the URL filtering feature, which is the most popular."
"It's a monster, it's got so many beautiful features. We do deal with other firewalls and we've got a better idea of what other firewalls' capabilities are, any comparison with the Palo Alto I liked the quality of service on the applications that you can control the amount of bandwidth an application is allowed to consume. The best feature is the quality of the application quality of service."
"For those who want a next-gen firewall that's easy to configure and easy to operate, I think you should go for Palo Alto."
"The hardware-based version of Check Point IPS could be more scalable. Right now, it's not scalable."
"What I would like to improve in IPS would be the capacity of the hardware. I would also like to be able to sort signatures by severity. This would greatly impact how well I can manage my environment."
"I am not aware of a preview channel or some repository to have a preview on upcoming signatures, however, this would be nice to have."
"I would like the product to provide us with intelligence to understand what we really have in our environment."
"It is generally good, but improving the performance would be the one thing I'd take a look at right now."
"Despite being a blade, this is expensive."
"The cost is a bit high but it is worth it."
"Sometimes we had false positives where packages that were legitimate for us were blocked and we had to unblock them through exceptions."
"Generally, to deploy it will take some downtime, about a day."
"The documentation needs to be improved. I need better information about how to configure it and what the best practices are."
"Sometimes when you want to group a set of ports, and communicate with Palo Alto, you cannot group TCP and UDP ports together. This needs to be adjusted."
"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower. In comparison with other solutions, I believe they're quite competitive."
"The price of licenses should be lowered to make it less costly to scale our solution."
"The installation was complicated."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"The solution needs to improve its local technical support services. There is no premium support offered in our market."
More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point IPS is ranked 3rd in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 46 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is ranked 7th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 24 reviews. Check Point IPS is rated 8.6, while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Check Point IPS writes "Great for detection and access with the capabilities of defining specific rules". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention writes "A good amount of granularity and advanced URL filtering capabilities". Check Point IPS is most compared with Darktrace, Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, Cisco NGIPS and Fortinet FortiGate IPS, whereas Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Arista NDR, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Darktrace. See our Check Point IPS vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.