We performed a comparison between OPNsense and SonicWall TZ based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: OPNsense is highly praised for its ability to easily adapt to changing needs, its guest access options, its flexibility, and its open license. SonicWall TZ is known for its exceptional unified threat management, strong VPN capabilities, reliable web security, and user-friendly centralized interface.
OPNsense could benefit from improvements in interface simplicity, bandwidth management, high availability, logging, integration, hardware updates, reporting, SSL inspection, and learning curve. SonicWall TZ needs enhancements in rated throughput, secondary DNS hosting, cloud management, user interface, integration, marketing, reporting, additional ports, GSM and Sonic Analyzer features, advanced features and pricing, UI application and net policies, scalability and proxy feature, DPI-SSL clients, content filtering, DNS hosting, monitoring and pricing, security and VPN connections, overall cost, and version improvements.
Service and Support: The customer service for OPNsense has garnered varying feedback, with certain users appreciating prompt responses and valuable aid, whereas some encounter challenges when attempting to access support. SonicWall TZ's support has also generated diverse opinions, as a few customers face language barriers and delays, but overall find the support satisfactory.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for OPNsense is uncomplicated and can be managed by clients without IT expertise, although it might be more time-consuming in certain scenarios like Azure. SonicWall TZ setup is simple, user-friendly, and can be finished within a timeframe ranging from 30 minutes to a few hours. Technical staff can provide assistance for swift deployment.
Pricing: The cost of setting up OPNsense primarily depends on the hardware used, since the software is provided for free. SonicWall TZ has received varying opinions regarding its pricing and licensing, with some users considering it cost-effective while others find it to be expensive.
ROI: OPNsense is a cost-effective option with a quicker return on investment due to the absence of ongoing fees. SonicWall TZ delivers satisfactory outcomes, although it suggests an upgrade for enhanced performance.
Comparison Results: Based on user feedback, OPNsense is the preferred choice when comparing it to SonicWall TZ. Users appreciate OPNsense for its scalability, excellent features, user-friendly interface, flexibility, stability, availability of a free version, and well-documented resources.
"There is an easy process for configuring it, and it is straightforward to implement the device from scratch."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are it is one of the most mature firewalls in the UTM bundle."
"The product is very stable, easy to troubleshoot, and configure, so it has reduced the time it takes for support."
"Fortinet FortiGate's reliability is valuable."
"The email protection and VPN features are the most valuable."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the APIs. They are the most widely known."
"Consolidated our network environment at all locations, but mainly at our datacenter."
"Valuable features include the Web Application Firewall, and it even has DLP (data leak prevention)."
"It's open source."
"The DNS-level filtering is impressive for thwarting time scanners."
"We can open a new VPN connection easily. It's much easier than with Fortinet in our experience."
"We have been operating here in our lab for several months, and everything appears to be extremely stable."
"OPNsense is highly stable."
"OPNsense is easy to use and open source."
"The IDS and IPS features are valuable. From the usability perspective, there is a lot of good documentation. As IT professionals, we found it very easy to configure the firewall. It was easy to configure and use."
"One of the most valuable features is the network checking. Additionally, the firewall and web filtering functionalities are highly useful."
"Its user interface and simplicity are the most favorite parts for our clients. They find it stable and easy to use. Its performance is also good."
"We use the content filter quite a lot because it's an office setting. During working hours, we like to censor the sites users can visit so it increases productivity. Therefore, the content filter has been good for us."
"The solution's VPN is very good for stability and detecting threats."
"We like their interface very much. It's pretty easy to use."
"We are very much happy with the support."
"No negative impression of the scalability."
"The solution boasts good performance and is easy to use."
"It protects against intrusion while allowing needed access."
"Technical support is good but the response time could be faster."
"Reporting is limited to providing an external appliance for improving the reporting capabilities of the FortiAnalyzer. It does not offer a central management and is also sold separably as an appliance."
"Improvement is needed in the Web Filter quotas to restrict users with allocated quotas."
"There were quite a few problems with the stability of the system."
"Some of the filtering is not robust, you can escape it with a VPN. Some of the users bypass some of the filters. It catches some but it also misses some, that area could be improved. It's functioning reasonably but there's room for improvement in that area."
"It is quite new for us, and we need to go more in-depth into the monitoring tools. It provides different features that we need to do what we want. So far, it is okay for us. In terms of improvement, in the future, they can provide a faster implementation of features. Some of the features are first available in other solutions. Fortinet sometimes takes a little bit longer than other solutions, such as Check Point, to implement new features."
"Application management can be improved."
"The firmware needs improvement because there are bugs when a new release comes through. Sometimes, the configuration changes, and it's a bit harder to see where the fail is. The first time that you have the firmware, it tends to have some issues, and it's better to wait a bit to update the equipment."
"The user interface could be improved, and the DNS section should be more intuitive."
"There is room for improvement in SSL inspection."
"Its interface should be a little bit better."
"The interface of the solution is an area with shortcomings."
"The IPS solution could be more reliable."
"They should improve IPEs for security in the future."
"OPNsense could improve by making the configuration more web-based rather than shell or command-line-based."
"I think the most important thing is that it should be easily accessible, but currently, that doesn't seem to be the case. We need a hardware platform that's based on common standards and open computing principles, which would be like a commodity and benefit us greatly."
"From a support perspective, if we're talking tech support I think Silver Partners, Gold Partners, Platinum, whatever level, should have a different number to call. End users can call tech support over at SonicWall if they've paid for support as part of their AGSS or whatever services they bought. The end-user can call, or we can call, however, I don't want to be calling the same line that an end user's calling. I don't want the same response time. I need a different level of expertise."
"The solution must provide more ports."
"In an upcoming release, SonicWall could improve by adding cloud management for all devices for free or at a nominal cost. Currently, they have a cloud management platform but is not free. We have the MySonicWall portal for purchasing from them for software updates and renewals."
"It could probably be more user-friendly, and it could be more scalable with releases and subscriptions."
"The VPN that is available in the new version is a bit bulky and slower in speed."
"We would like to improve the rules configuration in SonicWall TZ. Sometimes the rules don't work."
"Sonic Analyzer could be improved. It's difficult to manage and not very intuitive."
"We require centralized monitoring of the network features, which they have but they are not to the level that we require."
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while SonicWall TZ is ranked 12th in Firewalls with 78 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while SonicWall TZ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall TZ writes "Has efficient user access control feature and good technical support services ". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and Check Point NGFW, whereas SonicWall TZ is most compared with Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, SonicWall NSa and Zyxel Unified Security Gateway. See our OPNsense vs. SonicWall TZ 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.
