We performed a comparison between OPNsense and Sophos XGS 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."Fortinet FortiGate appears to be scalable."
"I only deal with it from a security analyst's point of view. I don't really get into the features of the actual FortiGate. From the security point of view, it works, and it does its job."
"The web filtering feature and the intrusion protection system are the most valuable. It is a resilient appliance. I never had an issue with it in terms of any security breaches."
"This solution has solid UTM features combined with a nice GUI."
"FortiGate is very simple to manage and easy to use."
"Their reliability and their policy of pre-shipping replacements when a unit has failed."
"The solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ability to work in proxy mode, which other solutions, such as Palo Alto cannot. There are some features that are better that come at no extra license or subscriptions cost, such as basic SD-WAN. The DLT is useful, other solutions have the same feature too, such as Palo Alto."
"We can open a new VPN connection easily. It's much easier than with Fortinet in our experience."
"I feel that its valuable features are that it is simple and free."
"I find the solution to be user-friendly. It has a lot of reports and easy settings."
"The graphic user interface is very good and it is user-friendly which makes the product easy-to-use."
"OPNsense could improve by making the configuration more web-based rather than shell or command-line-based."
"URL blocking, Wireguard, Tail Scale, Engine Blocker, and VPN are the most valuable features for me."
"The VPN server feature is the most valuable. It is integrated with Radius and AAA for doing accounting and authentication. Insight view is also an important feature for me at this time. It allows me to assess our network traffic. I also like the firewall feature. The BSD kernel has a packet filter. It is one of the most solid frameworks for firewalls. Its user interface is one of the best interfaces I have used."
"It is a very good solution. I like the dashboard. I can see what is going on and manage it as I like it."
"It is very stable. I have not heard of any issue where clients would have to replace hardware. It's been really stable for a long while."
"We are happy and satisfied with all the features."
"It's much faster than the previous firewall, so you can do the work faster."
"Setup was straightforward. One person is enough for deployment."
"The threat intelligence capabilities of the tool are good."
"All the features are valuable, in my opinion, but for us the most important features are the network security, application control, and web server protection. Sophos Sandstorm is another good feature off the top of my head."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos is the VPN solution. I also value their threat management, IPS IDS features and login features with single sign-on."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"The captive portal could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a stable solution. However, my issue is the performance only. When I use all the profiles, this affects the performance. From the beginning, I should have had a better sizing of the box."
"Fortinet FortiGate should improve the VPN tokens."
"With FortiGate, the main complaint that I have heard is about the technical support."
"There is one big configuration file with no separations for the unique VDOMs. Maybe they could separate individual VDOM configuration files with the root VDOM configuration file referencing the individual VDOM config files."
"Palo Alto has a feature called WildFire Analysis that is unavailable in FortiGate. WildFire is better than a sandbox because it can address zero-day threats and vulnerabilities. It can immediately identify zero-day threats from the cloud."
"If they could extend their fabric towards other vendor environments for integration, that would be great."
"The reporting part could be better."
"There should be more technical documentation."
"While they do have paid options that actually gives better features, for most of the clients, if they tend to take a paid option will instead opt for Fortinet."
"The support for OPNsense is good because we have documents available on the internet. The support could improve a little."
"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."
"The solution could be more secure."
"We did not like the fact that you have to configure everything with the graphic user interface. We have used other firewalls, such as FortiGate, that you can configure via code. OPNsense is not easy to integrate. When you are deploying via GitHub or another source repository, this is not possible. That's one thing we didn't like much."
"The ability to set the VPN IP address would be a welcome addition."
"The application is a little slow; it takes five to ten seconds to respond to every click when configuring. If we need to do significant configuration, it can take a lot of time. This might be because we have a low-end machine, and it could be faster with a high-end one."
"Sophos' technical support has degraded in the last couple of years. They seem to need to ask a lot of questions, even with simple problems, and take a long time to provide solutions."
"Having previously worked with the Astaro Security Gateway platform (now called Sophos UTM), I can attest that the configuration and dashboard for this older platform was easier to manage than that of both Sophos XG and XGS. If it were up to me, I would prefer to go back to the older SG dashboard."
"Sophos configurations are a bit complex."
"In my view, Sophos operates effectively in a reactive mode, focusing on static detection and forwarding traffic. However, Fortinet takes a more proactive approach, blocking both connection and route connections. While Sophos forwards any connection in both inbound and outbound traffic, I believe this is a positive aspect, especially in a country with various sizing considerations. This is my perspective, emphasizing the significance of Sophos XGS in software work."
"There are some issues with conversion and user roles when upgrading to Cyberoam."
"I rate Sophos' support five out of 10. It's sometimes difficult to contact them, and finding a solution is not easy."
"I would like to see them in third-party evaluation reports like Gartner, Magic Quadrant, or Forrester to make it easier for us to show our customers that Sophos is a leader in the market."
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while Sophos XGS is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 62 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while Sophos XGS is rated 7.8. 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 Sophos XGS writes "Easy to use, simple to learn, and offers great reporting". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and SonicWall TZ, whereas Sophos XGS is most compared with Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense, WatchGuard Firebox, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Meraki MX. See our OPNsense vs. Sophos XGS 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.
