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."The clients of the customers have a facility to access the enterprise network."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"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."
"Organizations that already use the Check Point NGFW Solution do not require any additional hardware, which makes the implementation straightforward and reduces the time to go live."
"The tool is easy to configure and use. We integrated it with Active Directory to manage user authentication. It's intuitive and transparent, making it simple for users to use. It connects automatically to the VPN whenever users turn on the laptop. The product is efficient and offers centralized control."
"The solution implemented in the cloud allows us to easily scale in cases of user increase."
"The safety of online interactions when working with this product has enabled members to convene productive meetings without fear of being attacked."
"It offers a simple configuration and setup."
"One of the greatest things about F5 Load Balancer is that it provides additional capability for handling huge workloads and routing them to an SAP or non-SAP application. It is capable of supporting a large amount of user workload and application connectivity workload. This was the main reason why we chose F5."
"Traffic Learning is the most valuable feature."
"Where we are finding the AWS version helpful is when we are trying to scale up new environments. AWS Marketplace helps here a lot."
"The solution has good load balancing capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of F5 BIG-IP LTM is brand image and recognition and the application delivery controller."
"It makes the publishing of applications to the Internet safer."
"BIG-IP LTM's most valuable feature is that it allows you to seamlessly add more servers without impacting your application's configuration."
"The value and impact of using F5 BIG-IP LTM for application delivery control in our organization are significant."
"There needs to be a way to create a VPN client specific to our environment so that we can easily lock down who can connect."
"The product’s architecture is a bit distributed."
"There is always room for innovation and the addition of new features."
"The maximum it is giving us is only 5 licenses and if you need more, they must be purchased separately."
"Improvements for Check Point Remote Access VPN could include enhancing mobile connectivity for a smoother user experience."
"Bug Fixes and enhancement requests should be remediated earlier."
"I cannot see the full effect of the endpoint solution because it relies on having access to the DNF queries, which might not go through the Check Point firewall when you're using it for perimeter networks. Check Point will not identify the actual source of the net queries. This may be related to the architecture, however, and not poor product issues. I don't know if it can be improved on the Check Point side or not."
"We would like to implement HTML5 (clientless access) in the product without installing any additional software."
"Needs to provide a visual interface to follow a customer's activity (from client to BIG-IP to SNAT IP to the chosen server, then back). Today, we are still performing packet captures."
"Not everything is intuitive."
"One area for improvement with F5 BIG-IP LTM could be its pricing, which some may find on the higher side."
"Technical support could be improved."
"If we decide to migrate to the cloud, I don't think that BIG-IP is a good solution and we probably won't use it."
"I would like them to expand load balancing, being able to go across multiple regions to on-premise and into the cloud. This could use improvement, as it is sometimes a little cumbersome."
"I would like to see better integration."
"There are not very many areas for improvement, but the price is high."
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.