We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Radware Alteon based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its user interface is very easy to use on a day-to-day basis. It is very user-friendly."
"It is stable."
"This is a solution that does what it's supposed to do at the price point."
"The feature I find the most valuable is the support infrastructure."
"It is very intuitive, easy to deploy, and manage."
"The stability is excellent."
"We're able to do load balancing and global load balancing. When you marry those two products together, you can do a lot more. We're able to deliver our applications more securely and faster. It has improved our deliverability where we have more service across the shared data centers. We can intelligently reach all of those client connections across all of the servers and do it fairly quickly. It has helped improve our application delivery and performance."
"It has so many features. First of all, it has a full proxy architecture, it has multiple modules. The best feature is the WAF, the web application firewall module. It also has cashing type capabilities. It has all kinds of load-balancing algorithms based on your IT requirements."
"The interface is easy, it's friendly, and has good alerting."
"Security is one of the most valuable features that I like. It is easy to use and easy to configure."
"I found the link load balancer and server load balancer are the most valuable."
"The health status information, with its highly detailed reporting, has saved us time on troubleshooting. We have the precise information needed that helps us find different types of situations."
"Radware has been characterized by being extremely robust. This gives us the confidence to offer our users a continuous service."
"I like the concept of self-service, that I can do everything on my own."
"I like the web GUI. It's very intuitive and easy to use."
"It saves us a lot of work in terms of management since it has tasks already defined automatically. That enables us to better administer our services. It is very dynamic and easy to administer."
"A more hybrid approach would be beneficial for users."
"The solution's hardware quality needs improvement."
"Technical support could be faster. It's something I'd like to see them work on in the future."
"The pricing of the product is a bit too high."
"The management interface is unclear, complex, and not concise. I would like a better user interface."
"I would like them to have more flexible models."
"It's a very expensive solution."
"Native support for containers should be added to future releases, as this is the future of load balancing."
"Support is very important because if we get good support, we'll be able to sell and supply more numbers."
"I would like this solution to have an integration tool that will convert configuration from other software, into readable values for this product during implementation."
"It can be improved by combining the web application firewall (WAF) facility."
"Support is an area that needs improvement."
"We recently had a problem with the tables Obsolete ARP which was observed by the support team. It would be good to diagnose and solve this problem with a patch since it is not documented that it will be solved in later updates."
"We are in the process of updating our version of the solution, so judging what should be improved is difficult. But in some cases, the visualization takes a while, especially for mapping issues."
"Their support can be better. The Radware management is very proactive. We can connect to anybody in Radware Management in India. We can even connect with the MD of Radware India. However, their lower level staff should be more proactive towards the customers."
"I would like the solution to display and help visualize the reference map more easily. I would also like to better understand where queries come from and know which users are consulting the application, along with which app."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 7th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 33 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Radware Alteon is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "It's a good fit for a small team because the maintenance is easier and you don't need to know how to code". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and Kemp LoadMaster, whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, A10 Networks Thunder ADC, HAProxy and NGINX Plus. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Radware Alteon report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.
Apart from throughout consideration. Radware license charges based on throughput and F5 charges based on features only. For example, if you buy F5 with an appliance throughput of 10g that throughput available on day one, but if it's Radware, you will get a 1gbps license and hardware has 10gbps throughput. You can only use 1gbps on day one. On the load balancing side, both are equal only I rule is the game-changer. A lot of customization is possible with irule.
For ADC both are very good, But in the leader in Gartner of ADC products, the tops rivals are Citrix ADC and F5
They are very good and can do the job but only some major differences to consider are.
Citrix ADC - Has App Expert Wizard which is a GUI ready to use to build simple to complex traffic syntax rule easily. Any admin that has some good background sees this syntax can understand and configure, it is very easy. This is good for a big complex environment or in case your network admin leaves the job and new one comes to take the role.
GUI; Travesing each menu is very easy as they are all in the same pattern with every feature.
F5 - Use the iRule, which does the same job. If you like to write programming code with lots of { { } }, etc, it's ok. But for many admin teams, it may be hard to troubleshoot the traffics rules if the guy who wrote the rule left, not that hard to learn but still harder than GUI.
GUI- F5 GUI is sometimes too complex than needed, sometimes it's left, right, under have to drill down a lot just to get to the simple tasks.
Overall there are both good.