We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Remote Access solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This platform has developed a reliable communication infrastructure that employees can use to communicate with remote workers."
"I like the fact that Remote Access allows the administrator to control and manage things. It makes things smoother, and it has been an excellent experience."
"Setup using the manuals was easy."
"The solution implemented in the cloud allows us to easily scale in cases of user increase."
"The policies are easy to use."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN is a stable solution."
"It allows everyone to work from home. If no one could work from home, then we wouldn't have a company, especially now during COVID-19. It's mission-critical, especially since it's currently being used. If there is a problem with it, we would really be screwed. We would be hard-pressed because we would have to figure out what solution we're going to go with, how to deploy it, how long it would take to deploy it, and how we'd even get it on people's computers if we couldn't VPN to them. It would be near impossible to just change to a new VPN solution right now."
"The biggest advantage of Check Point Remote Access VPN is that we already use the Check Point firewall. We only needed to enable the feature and do the configuration in order to enable the VPN feature. We didn't need to buy or manage new hardware. This was a big advantage."
"The iRule feature is very useful for inspecting HTTP. Sometimes, we use it for modifying the headers of the HTTP."
"We have multiple solutions we can deploy through the F5."
"BIG-IP LTM's most valuable feature is that it allows you to seamlessly add more servers without impacting your application's configuration."
"The most valuable features are the WAF and the big IP."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is IP Intelligence."
"Routing and load balancing are its most valuable features."
"The combination of ADC and WAN is good."
"It is an easy way to build application policies (graphical)."
"The product’s architecture is a bit distributed."
"The connection has gotten less smooth as the number of users increases. The issue is that the logs fill up quickly. Too many users are connecting remotely. It worked great when we only had a few remote connections. Now, it is disconnecting people and dropping the internet connection."
"The non-standard setup is quite complex as you have to do changes via GUI and CLI."
"Some configurations, like idle timeout (the requirement came from multiple users), are not possible to configure directly from the Check Point management server."
"We are very happy with the Windows client. You log in with the VPN for the full client, you do the log in there. But for Linux machines, they don't have a full client to install. It is important because we have some users that use Linux and they don't have a specific application from Check Point to use. That is something that could be improved."
"It's difficult to configure on Linux workstations as Check Point Remote VPN clients support only Windows and Mac devices."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN's connectivity and establishment takes time and needs to be faster."
"When you want to deploy a new Check Point agent, it is really a pain in the butt. For example, Windows 10 now has updates almost every couple of months. It changes the versioning and things under the hood. These are things that I don't understand, because I'm not a Windows person. However, I know that the Check Point client is installed on the Windows machine, and if the Check Point client's not kept up-to-date, then it's functionality breaks. It has to be up-to-date with the Windows versions. Check Point has to update the client more often. Now, the problem is that the Check Point client is not easy to update on remote computers and it's not easy to deploy a new client."
"It's a very expensive solution."
"They could improve the product's ease of use. There is some confusion how to operate it."
"The management interface is unclear, complex, and not concise. I would like a better user interface."
"LTM's cloud capabilities could be improved. Cloud providers all offer load balancing, but you can't get the same level of security. F5's cloud service is still not on par with its on-prem service."
"The pricing could always be better. It's a bit expensive."
"The price for F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is very high. This aspect could be improved."
"The pricing model has caused some frustration. My clients implemented the solution and later wanted to upgrade the features but the pricing structure was complicated. There are other solutions with better pricing models."
"Bugs are the part of program and they are fixed with every release, as with any vendor."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 4th in Remote Access with 60 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Fortinet FortiClient and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and HAProxy. See our Check Point Remote Access VPN vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.
We monitor all Remote Access 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.
