We performed a comparison between Sangfor NGAF and Sophos UTM 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."The security on offer is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."
"The most valuable features are the policies, filtering, and configuration."
"The solution can scale well."
"The features that we have found most valuable are the SSL VPN and the User Portal."
"The IPS is good. It protect my network from attackers."
"The product offers very good security."
"FortiGate improved our security. It's one of the best hardware firewalls."
"It enables us to not only detect but also prevent various types of incoming threats, allowing us to take appropriate corrective actions and exercise control over the network."
"I think Sangfor NGAF is more valuable than Cisco products because of its simplicity and ease of management. If I compare it with Palo Alto and Cisco, both are quite complex products. And if I compare it with FortiGate firewalls from Fortinet, I have also used all these products. Fortinet and Sangfor NGAF are similar products because the applications behind the application and policy layers are almost identical."
"Sangfor has the best capabilities for securing connections, securing web browsers, securing servers, and general threat protection."
"It is a stable solution."
"The product is very fast and reliable."
"Sangfor NGAF works accordingly with our customers. The solution has good performance, easy to use, and integrates well with the endpoints."
"The most valuable feature of Sangfor NGAF is its integration."
"The most valuable features are the WAN optimization, the internet access gateway (IAG), and the central console, which allows us to implement on their firewall."
"Configuration could not be made any easier."
"What I like about the solution is the ease of use."
"With over 150 firewalls in our portal, management and monitoring have never been easier."
"Efficient and effective - it's easy to separate rules."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It allows our developers to be able to securely log into servers to deploy and manage software."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features of Sophos UTM are the ease of use, it is very user-friendly. You can understand what they implement in the new firmware, and it's easy to manage the firewalls."
"Its reporting and pricing need improvement."
"Compared to some other products, the DLP is not at par for the moment."
"I don't like that anything more than very basic reporting is not included."
"The solution lacks sufficient filtering."
"Their software support needs improvement. I would prefer to have better support for bug fixes. Sometimes, we open a ticket, and it is very difficult to get a solution. Specifically, we are not at all happy with their support for load balancing."
"I would like to see more advanced developments of a wireless controller in the future."
"I haven't had a single issue since using Fortinet."
"Its reporting can be improved. Sometimes, I don't get proper reports."
"They need to improve their research team and they need to study their data to analyze it and build the product."
"Our experience with its customer support was quite challenging."
"Sangfor NGAF could improve by refining its application control policies, especially in addressing challenges with certain types of applications."
"An area of improvement for Sangfor NGAF could be in the field of reporting and logging."
"The setup phase is quite complex."
"Sangfor could improve their interface capacity on the 5100 series model and upgrade their hardware from one gig to 10 gig. This would improve the overall throughput."
"The web interface needs to be improved, making it more user-friendly."
"The interface and user experience are horrible."
"This product could use some improvement with web filtering. It takes a lot of time and effort to set up and maintain."
"During initial configuration, I encountered a few issues."
"I don't really have any notes for improvements."
"The documentation during the AWS integration was a little fuzzy on getting it to work with how the whole public exposure versus private exposure, then routing some of the traffic."
"Sophos UTM's internet security could be better."
"We'd like to see them offer their services on mobile devices like tablets. I'm not sure if that's an option or not."
"I didn't like it much. It suits only small businesses. It isn't scalable and reliable. There is a very critical issue with the power supply."
"The solution needs to do better at covering mobile devices, although they may have an integrated solution for that purpose."
Sangfor NGAF is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 31 reviews while Sophos UTM is ranked 3rd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 110 reviews. Sangfor NGAF is rated 8.0, while Sophos UTM is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Sangfor NGAF writes "Affordable, easy to configure firewall with fast, responsive support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos UTM writes "It's a highly stable platform with very few hardware issues". Sangfor NGAF is most compared with Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW and SonicWall NSa, whereas Sophos UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, OPNsense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Cisco Secure Firewall. See our Sangfor NGAF vs. Sophos UTM 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.
