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.
"Fortinet FortiGate is stable. It's used across all the countries, this is the way most multinationals run their system."
"Some of the valuable features are the firewall, IPS, web filter, and gateway capabilities. Additionally, it is easy to use and flexible."
"The Intrusion Prevention System and the web filtering are both working well."
"The payment function for applications is good."
"It performs very well."
"The usage in general is pretty good."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a scalable solution."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"OPNsense is easy to use and open source."
"I find the solution to be user-friendly. It has a lot of reports and easy settings."
"I have found the solution has some great features overall, such as guest access capabilities, dashboards, and ease of use. There is plenty of documentation and support and it has the plugins that I needed."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to configure."
"The technical support is very good."
"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's open source."
"The most valuable features are reporting, the Sensei plugin, and firewall capabilities."
"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."
"SonicWall TZ is a stable product."
"The most valuable features are security and technical support."
"The network security is great."
"No negative impression of the scalability."
"SonicWall TZ is a very cost-effective solution that provides good security."
"User-friendly firewall solution which scales well, is stable, and has high availability."
"The solution boasts good performance and is easy to use."
"It would be a benefit if Fortinet would release a one-stop solution that is better integrated with other products and an automated emergency response system."
"It can be a little bit more user-friendly in terms of policy definition and implementation. It seems a little bit complicated, and it could be simplified."
"The firewall engine is not so strong as of now, in my opinion... My second concern is that, while they have Zero-day vulnerability and anti-malware features, the threat engine needs to be strengthened, its efficiency can be increased."
"My only complaint about FortiGate is a lack of QinQ VLAN tunneling. I haven't found this feature in any Fortinet product. You can do this on all Cisco routers, including the smaller models. However, QinQ isn't available on the biggest, most expensive Fortinet units. They still don't have that. I think now we're on software version 6.0, and they still haven't found a solution for QinQ. It isn't a dealbreaker, but that's my main complaint."
"It needs to improve its ISP load balancing."
"There is a lot of improvement needed with SSL-VPN."
"FortiGate support could do some improvements on their IPv6 configuration. Right now it's still in the very early stage for utilizing in an enterprise level network environment."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"There should be more technical documentation."
"The user interface could be improved, and the DNS section should be more intuitive."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
"The interface needs to be simplified. It is not user-friendly."
"There are some add-ons that need enhancements to make management easier for users, especially the reporting features. Some reports don't show the level of detail I'm looking for, and I've had trouble installing certain add-ons, especially for Internet bandwidth shaping within my company."
"Given that OPNsense plays a pivotal role as a firewall, safeguarding against various threats, having a reliable backup ensures uninterrupted protection even if unforeseen events impact the primary virtual machine."
"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."
"I would like better documentation concerning the provided packages and their integration."
"I can't get the support that I need from SonicWall."
"I would like them to make the interface a little bit easier to use so you can find out where in the heck you're going instead of having to go to 15 different places to get something installed."
"Pricing could be lowered slightly."
"I would like the solution to build in more redundancy. I"
"The price could be better for us in Bolivia."
"They should consider working a bit more on their ransomware application."
"The solution's pricing could be made cheaper."
"SonicWall TZ can improve the UI application and when you create any net policies or any new policy, it will not sync or work properly."
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.
