We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The threat prevention is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"Offers good security and filtering."
"The pricing is great and very reasonable."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"Some of the valuable features are the firewall, IPS, web filter, and gateway capabilities. Additionally, it is easy to use and flexible."
"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."
"In terms of security, we have not experienced any security flaws or loopholes, and it has proven to be quite stable."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is load balancing. It can provide central management and VPNA. Additionally, it has enhanced our security environment."
"I have two offices, and I can route the internet of both offices using the same product. The connectivity is great."
"Forcepoint is a good, stable solution."
"I like the Firewall and the IPS."
"The most valuable feature is SD-WAN."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support."
"The solution offers sandboxing, which can be integrated at any time."
"It is a stable solution, and there are no issues so far."
"The people we deal with is a local partner in Cambodia and we can get good support from them."
"Provision of quality training material and the reporting is very good."
"The ease of use and the ease of configuration of our policies are the most valuable features."
"The configuration is quite simple to understand."
"GlobalProtect and App-ID features are very good."
"They are regularly releasing new versions that include more integration with third-party services."
"I like the firewall's vulnerability management features, which give you reminders to update your system and update your OS."
"The most valuable features include the different security zones and the ability to identify applications not only by port numbers but by the applications themselves... And with the single-pass architecture, it provides a good trade-off between security and network performance. It provides good security and good network throughput."
"It has a unique approach to packet processing. It has single-pass architecture. We can easily perform policy lookups, application decoding, and integration or merging. This can be all done with a single pass. It effectively reduces the amount of processing required to perform multiple actions. This is the main advantage of using Palo Alto."
"The search tool needs improvement. It's very difficult to search for policies right now."
"Fortinet already improved FortiGate, but in the current market, many brands of security devices have improved together. Fortinet still needs to catch up with market standards. Fortinet is lacking in features in comparison to competitors."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having better visibility. Palo Alto has better visibility."
"Some features of Fortinet FortiGate are actually fee enabled that are inconvenient for deploying in production. Other issues relate to isolation with Cisco products and your server."
"The improvement is related to logs. Instead of the CLI, we should be able to have more insights into the logs of the firewall in the GUI."
"The cloud features can be improved."
"The feedback that I have received is that the performance could be better, and the user experience is not as good compared to a previous solution we used. It could be more user-friendly. Of course, it still works fine for our operations."
"The cloud features and integration could be improved."
"We feel the product's technical support could be better, as this relates to the solution itself, to the installation of the product, and to having a proper understanding of the case."
"The interface is complicated. It's difficult to locate all the necessary menus and functions."
"I would like to see more sizing in the next release, and the roadmap should be clear."
"A VPN client feature is missing in our region, which we hope Forcepoint will address in future updates."
"My team is looking for more throughput and better integration with our security framework."
"Forcepoint is a little difficult to configure compared to its competitors."
"The solution's support could use improvement."
"The initial setup of the Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall has areas that are difficult."
"Technical support is an area that could be improved."
"For an upcoming release, they could improve on the way to build security rules per user."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"Its scalability for on-prem deployments can be better. For an on-prem deployment, the hardware has to be replaced if the volume goes up to a certain level."
"I don't deal with it from a day-to-day perspective, but I can say that the evidence that I typically need is there, but sometimes, it's a task to actually get it and pull it out. They can make it easier to gather that evidence."
"The pricing could be improved. They need to work on the setup over the firewall, VLAN, and PPPoE."
"I'm thinking about a new feature. They have decryption. It's a good idea to use decryption on Palo Alto. It would be good if they had offloading of the traffic, and if they could decrypt the traffic and offload it. Like, for example, ASM on our site. We have an SSL decryption to offload the traffic. We could use that on Palo Alto."
"We are not happy with Palo Alto at all. It would be better if they provided more support for the firewall. We have a few pending issues with the configuration for each application. We cannot deploy them yet due to some support-related problems in the firewall. We have deployed a few policies for DNS spoofing and DNS attacks, but we could only block a few IP addresses through the policy. That's DNS security, and we have configured a few policies for DNS spoofing and more. URL categorization and URL filtering are not yet adequately maintained. For example, if you created a few rules in the rule-based configuration and made some rules downstairs, you will lose some of them if you give access upstairs. It's not giving us a proper solution for which route it is using. We need to apply the application-based policies and URL filtering-based policies. It creates more issues because we are not getting good support from the team."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 41 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 5th in Firewalls with 164 reviews. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Provides decent protection for the LAN but complicated interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point NGFW, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and Cisco SD-WAN, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense. See our Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.