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."It is a scalable solution."
"We can keep track of all the customer's requirements. We can forecast our trails and we can forecast our overall financial things."
"They give us the ability to configure many features for DDoS. There are many items that we can use."
"Thunder TPS has automated mitigation and fully managed support in case the device cannot handle the attack. They have engineers available to respond."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of A10 Thunder TPS is load balancing."
"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."
"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."
"Radware DefensePro's most valuable feature lies in its ability to mitigate non-traffic attacks."
"It has not gone down for a quite long time. It's working fine."
"The DDoS protection that the solution provides is its most valuable feature."
"Its functionality is very good."
"A flexible affordable solution for defense against DDos attacks."
"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 is one of the best solutions for on-premise protection."
"The reporting is very good and provides us with a comprehensive description of where attacks are emanating from."
"I rate Thunder TPS seven out of 10 for scalability."
"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."
"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."
"We have had some issues with implementation. So, it is the only area that needs improvement."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"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."
"Its documentation could be better."
"We currently do not use the solution's machine-learning-powered Zero-day Automated Protection because of an issue with it... We also use the aGalaxy platform, which is a management platform for the TPS devices. The issue is that some TPS features were added at the TPS level but weren't carried over to aGalaxy, and we manage all of our devices through aGalaxy. So we can't actually use some of the new features that are available on the TPS because that functionality doesn't exist in aGalaxy. That is one of my biggest complaints."
"They need to increase the limit of devices that we can manage."
"Right now, we have DefensePro 6. The only complaint I have is that SSL inspection, when activated, consumes a lot of resources on the machine. We are currently reviewing a possible change to DefensePro X, the new version, which has a separate module with its processors."
"I would like to see more focus on layer seven protection."
"The solution needs a bit more functionality. It would be good if DefensePro could have anti-bot functionalities in order to stop bots like web scrapers from getting onto our customers’ network."
"The solution is a little more pricey than other options on the market."
"I would like to see better implementation of a zero-day attack implementation strategy with self-mitigation."
"This solution may not cover all of the requirements in situations for which I am unfamiliar, and there is always room for improvement."
"I would like to see more graphics within the dashboard. Right now, you are required to buy tools in order to have graphical representation for your monitoring."
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.