We performed a comparison between A10 Thunder TPS and Radware DefensePro based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The GUI is very use-friendly. You can configure it through CLI or GUI, they give you an option to choose. It's a good solution in terms of the appliance itself. It's very light compared to other brands that offer DDoS solutions."
"The most valuable feature of A10 Thunder TPS is load balancing."
"We selected the solution because of its programmable automated defense using RESTful API. We didn't want to connect to the box. We wanted to be able to do some automation. We wanted to have our own portal because we wanted to connect our customers to our own UI using the A10 API. It has been good and exactly what we need."
"The response time to an attack is instant. We've used some outsourced solutions in the past, out in the cloud, that weren't so quick. But it's all within our control now. We control how fast it mitigates."
"The solution has reduced the amount of manual intervention required during an attack. We have the inline solution and when it comes to the customers that we have on it, it has saved us some troubleshooting time."
"Based on previous equipment that we had, it's amazing that this device can do what it can do in a 1U form factor. The devices that we have right now have never gone over capacity and we've actually mitigated some pretty large attacks."
"They give us the ability to configure many features for DDoS. There are many items that we can use."
"The solution's support is one of the coolest things about the product. I"
"They have a hybrid model approach if a client wants to go that way."
"The product is very effective and performs well on devices."
"The product integrates well with Cisco."
"SSL-based mitigation from DDoS attacks is good from their side. They are capable of preventing SSL-based attacks with certifications and everything loaded onto them."
"As a service provider, we use the SecOps dashboard feature. That's where we check the time of attacks to see if an attack is happening at the moment or if it has already happened... It is very dynamic and helps us know when an attack occurred, how long it lasted, and what type of attack it was."
"Radware DefensePro's most valuable feature lies in its ability to mitigate non-traffic attacks."
"Technologically simple and effective."
"This solution is extremely scalable and has the highest level throughput (100G) which complies with Telco deployment."
"The upgrade process for the boxes is not efficient. We have to go through the A10 aGalaxy where we have issues, like timeouts. They told me it was fixed in the latest version, but I tried to do it on the Portal and it is not working all the time."
"If there's one aspect of A10 that needs improvement it would be the training. All of their training is done online, at least in what we've been exposed to. I would like to have a classroom environment for training... It would give [people] a chance to provision it."
"The last issue we had to contact them about was just a question of a false-positive. The A10 system wasn't supposed to decide what is a false-positive. So if we send it good traffic, it's supposed to just pass that good traffic through. But we opened this last ticket because the A10 did block some of the good traffic. Their support had to tweak it a little bit, but it wasn't anything that took a long time."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"They have a cloud scrubbing feature that redirects the traffic if the on-prem appliance can't accommodate a large amount of traffic but it's not available where we are."
"Its documentation could be better."
"It is very difficult to implement. It should be made a bit easier to implement. There is also a lack of resources on the internet. They need to develop more resources."
"We have had some issues with implementation. So, it is the only area that needs improvement."
"I would like to see more focus on layer seven protection."
"There needs to be more reporting."
"As a service provider, we are expecting the multi-tenancy feature on the dashboard and reporting side. It will help share reports with customers in real-time. They can directly see them online. We are working with their team on API integration with our portal. We will be able to achieve that, but it will take some time."
"The dashboard could be updated."
"It would be ideal if they could expand protocol support to cover emerging communication standards and ensure comprehensive protection against diverse attack vectors."
"I would like to see better implementation of a zero-day attack implementation strategy with self-mitigation."
"Radware DefensePro requires a continuous learning process. Using this technology, we can improve our network. Based on the different attack mechanisms, we use Radware DefensePro to provide security for our clients' networks very effectively."
"It could incorporate more intelligence for reacting with web site visitors."
A10 Thunder TPS is ranked 15th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 12 reviews while Radware DefensePro is ranked 5th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 23 reviews. A10 Thunder TPS is rated 8.8, while Radware DefensePro is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of A10 Thunder TPS writes "A highly stable solution that can be used for load balancing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware DefensePro writes "Regular signature update with good reporting and analytics". A10 Thunder TPS is most compared with Arbor DDoS, Cloudflare, Corero and Imperva DDoS, whereas Radware DefensePro is most compared with Arbor DDoS, Cloudflare, Imperva DDoS, Fortinet FortiDDoS and F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM). See our A10 Thunder TPS vs. Radware DefensePro report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.