Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] vs Fortinet FortiGate comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] and Fortinet FortiGate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls.
To learn more, read our detailed Firewalls Report (Updated: February 2024).
763,955 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Q&A Highlights
Question: Fortinet, Palo Alto or Check Point?
Answer: Hi, It's very hard to compare brand name of firewalls and you did not clarify specific models. Normally, an IT is often using a firewall and suggest that brand name. Actually, it will depend on what bundle of service you choose in each brand name of firewall. Of course, Palo Alto - it's worth it. My suggestion is base on your requirement of security and your budget, then read the specs of each brand name and choose whether the firewall is right to your network.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The filtering was very good.""The solution is very robust.""The most valuable feature for us was to implement negligent functionality, to direct functionality to viewer control and application control so we could disconnect, and at the same time, we installed checkpoints. We disconnected our proxy.""It provides visibility and drives organizational security.""The databases and its signatures are its most important features.""It safeguards against cyber attacks.""The UTM platform has been the most valuable.""Firewalls help us a lot in controlling traffic on our network and preventing unauthorized access."

More Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] Pros →

"It has improved our security capabilities.""Security management tool that's easy to integrate and easy to work with. No issues found with its stability and scalability.""The virtual firewall feature is the most valuable. We have around 1,500 firewalls. We did not buy individual hardware, and the virtual firewalls made sense because we don't have to keep on buying the hardware. FortiGate is easier to use as compared to Checkpoint devices. It is user friendly and has a good UI. You don't need much expertise to work on this firewall. You don't need to worry much about DCLA, commands, and things like that.""Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”""We are a visual effects company, and there have been a number of high profile security issues in our industry. This has brought us to a higher standard of security, which our clients are very keen on these days.""Customers are more inclined towards FortiGate because of application control, web filtering, and anti-spam features. The support from the FortiGate team is good, and price-wise, it is affordable.""The IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors.""We purchased Fortinet because of the pricing, its functionality, because it met our requirements, and the total cost of ownership over five years was quite reasonable. In the market, Fortinet is rated quite well."

More Fortinet FortiGate Pros →

Cons
"Technical support was very bad because the supplier who sold it to us, wasn't very supportive, and he wouldn't giving us direct links to the OEM.""Specifically on the user experience, sometimes the set up of things, such as the VPN SSL, takes a lot of time to load and a lot of time to get up and running on every session.""While the technical support is good, the Indian level technical support could use an upgrade.""Some features that could be improved are advanced threat protection, sandboxing, and vulnerability management.""As we don't have a representative of Check Point in Mozambique, this makes it very difficult when we have some issues to resolve.""The solution could be improved if there was a better way to report. The reporting functionality is not really good. Even though it's not the major function. Maybe adding a way to make a custom report.""The solution should be more user-friendly.""What has been the issue of firewalls is they ask me for policies and content filtering application control and all these features that are now part of Harmony."

More Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] Cons →

"There are a lot of bugs I have found in the solution and it is difficult to upgrade. These areas need improvement.""I would like to see improvements made to the dashboard and UI, as well as to the reporting.""Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve the logging and reporting. Additionally, the next-generation application's policies should be improved. When they were released they had bugs.""It is quite new for us, and we need to go more in-depth into the monitoring tools. It provides different features that we need to do what we want. So far, it is okay for us. In terms of improvement, in the future, they can provide a faster implementation of features. Some of the features are first available in other solutions. Fortinet sometimes takes a little bit longer than other solutions, such as Check Point, to implement new features.""I would prefer to have more detailed logs within the FortiGate products themselves rather than relying on a separate tool.""There could be more integration between the logging and analytical platforms to make it more seamless and integrated.""The cloud management and automation capability could be improved.""One area for improvement is the performance on bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."

More Fortinet FortiGate Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The pricing is too high."
  • "This cost is between 3,000 and 5,000 euros per year, so some other solutions are cheaper and the pricing should be improved."
  • More Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Fortinet has one or two license types, and the VPN numbers are only limited by the hardware chassis make."
  • "These boxes are not that expensive compared to what they can do, their functionality, and the reporting you receive. Fortinet licensing is straightforward and less confusing compared to Cisco."
  • "Go for long term pricing negotiated at the time of purchase."
  • "Work through partners for the best pricing."
  • "The value is the capability of having multiple services with one unique license, not having the limitation per user licensing schema, like other vendors."
  • "Easy to understand licensing requirements."
  • "​We saved a bundle by not needing all the past appliances from an NGFW.​"
  • "The cost is too high... They have to focus on more features with less cost for the customer. If you see the market, where it's going, there are a lot of players offering more features for less cost."
  • More Fortinet FortiGate Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
    763,955 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Answers from the Community
    Anonymous User
    it_user388629 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user388629 (Head of Operations at a tech services company with 51-200 employees)
    Consultant

    Are you limiting the results are a specific reason?

    The larger question here is what do they need? There is no one best, each one has a good pro and con list to compare. (do they need web filtering, geo ip blocking, layer 7 filtering, detail qos control, redundant link fail over, load balancing, client access, reports, automated reports, etc) There are a lot of open questions that can help anyone tailor what would be best to use.

    My personal experience with those mentioned is to go with Palo Alto. It has a good rock solid and stable OS and can be configured to most anything your client would need.
    Fortinet's: The OS has many issues with memory even when you over spec the unit. You will find yourself having to restart it pretty often. It does have a decent configuration gui. (My personal opinion unless it's a OS/Firmware upgrade the unit should never need rebooted).
    Check Point: At least the units I have had the wonderful time working with, have been very "finicky", granted the last one I seen was about two years ago now, which imo is a good thing. I was not impressed.

    Firewalls I did not see mentioned Cisco ASA/Firepower, Cisco Meraki, SonicWall, PFSense, Adtran.
    I do like the Cisco Units, though not for the faint of heart. Even the new ones you will find yourself in the shell often. That said there is a reason that most Datacenters use them, they have been around a long time and know how to build a good product.

    Meraki: These have surprised me. They are as good as the Palo Alto FWs and the recent (time is relative) acquisition of OpenDNS/Umbrella into their security stack is a good blend. Easy to configure, A good option if the client will be in the FW making changes. When Paired with other Meraki units the Single Pane of Glass configuration is a plus. The Reporting is a nice feature with the ability to alert on. The Layer 7 Filtering and QOS is super well thought out. Really, really easy to configure. I can walk most anyone through a setup.

    SonicWall: Just mentioning their name gives me headaches. Even after Dell purchased them the product isn't any better again just my opinion. They are easy to setup, and that is all I will give them.

    PFSense: I love OpenSource products, PFSense has a good plugin list and is easy to make your own. It is not for everyone. The recent last few firmware/OS upgrades introduced a better gui interface. Rock Solid (as long as you have good hardware.) They just work. You will however need to know the product well. Some configuration places can be confusing. Such as setting up Traffic Shaping is not as simple as in the others, "in a click of a button".

    Adtran: Adtran does not get mentioned enough. These units are good and do exactly what they are told. Never have to be rebooted unless you upgrading the firmware/os on the units. They are fast and as the phrase goes "they just work". The GUI is still a little dated when compared to others in the market, Once you get use to it though your golden. The Shell is near identical to the Cisco, so for Cisco guys it's an easy go between. They started out as a Voice vendor product, as you know voice is never allowed to go down and that is how their switches, routers, etc are.

    So to recap: It depends on what you want to do.

    In your original list, The Palo Alto is the winner.

    If you want to Expand it to the larger list I would say the Meraki if you want a good gui experience and support.

    If you just want it to work with a ton of no extra cost add-ons the PFSense is the next option if you're willing to put the effort into learning it inside and out, which only the hardcore guys seem to do.

    Matthew Titcombe - PeerSpot reviewerMatthew Titcombe
    Consultant

    I have worked on PA, CP, & Fortinet. I found Fortinet to be the most capable and best common interface for overall usage. As stated above, I found PA's to be overpriced for what they give you. Based on my monitoring this sector, CP & PA are trying ot catch up to Fortinet's and Cisco's ecosystem approaches. Cisco's Ecosystem, since I brought it up, still requires a user to know too many different interfaces and leads to configuration issues.

    My recommendation is Fortinet.

    ramesh1923 - PeerSpot reviewerramesh1923 (Technical Specialist with 5,001-10,000 employees)
    Real User

    I have experience is all flavors mentioned here.

    If you are thinking about the cost of the product , then go with Fortinet. Fortinet products are cheep when compare to PA or Checkpoint. Whereas the performance of the box is not mentioned on the datasheet. You have to rethink the value based real world traffic.

    For stable network m opinion is PA or checkpoint. Both devices have certain their own features which may not be replace by other device.

    I would you to consult with the SE who can understand your requirement and unique features required to your organization.

    it_user740859 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user740859 (It Security & Networking Manager at MCA IT)
    Consultant

    my opinión : i think all vendors in security are great but i prefer FORTINET

    it_user611814 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user611814 (Works)
    Vendor

    My opinion about firewalls --> FORTI (FortiGate) is the best out of those 3:Fortinet, Palo Alto, Check Point.

    Why? 1. Price (TCO), 2. Wide and complex functionality, 3. More userfriendly interface than ChPoint. Check Point is too expensive (my private opinion) compared with its functionality (the brand costs).

    I haven’t got any experience with Palo Alto.

    it_user540555 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user540555 (Works)
    Vendor

    Having worked for Nokia and Check Point for eight years as a Senior S.E., and SonicWALL, and also being very familiar with Palo, Fortinet, Cisco & Sophos, I'd say it all comes to the customer's requirements.
    When I was Director of Engineering at Intel for their FW/VPN, I asked marketing for the numbers of how much of our customer base was using the FW component of our product which was called and marketed a VPN. An astounding 48 per cent used the FW. I immediately had our gateway rebranded "Intel FW/VPN".
    According to IDC we were number 2 of market share at 14% behind Bottle at 20%.
    Unfortunately Intel bought our product as a "BB" (buy and bury). They took our code and put it on an ASIC chip and stamped it onto their NICks (network interface cards).
    Being the director of engineering I was responsible for a good portion of that.

    Rias Majeed - PeerSpot reviewerRias Majeed
    Real User

    I can support on Fortinet Firewalls and its integration.

    it_user479130 - PeerSpot reviewerit_user479130 (Security Solutions Architect at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees)
    MSP

    Best is subjective and I think there are many factors that could influence a decision.

    Fortinet are generally less expensive but I have found their management and product splintering to be cumbersome, support is hit and miss and depends on the partner you work with. That said if you are on a budget it could be a good choice.

    Palo have a good management platform, excellent firewalls and with the release of their new firewalls (820/50) have some cost effective solutions at the lower end, support is very good.

    Checkpoint have a very good management platform, average firewalls with sometimes over complex configuration and from experience I would have to say awful support.

    As always I would try to figure out what requirements and capabilities you are looking for, where the strengths and weaknesses of your security team lie and work from there. The solution should be built to fit your business requirements and budget.

    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer: When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage at large. In my opinion, Fortinet would be the best option and l use Fortinet too.… more »
    Top Answer:From my experience regarding both the Sophos and FortiGate firewalls, I personally would rather use FortiGate. I know the firewalls change every 5 to 7 years as stated but you really do need to… more »
    Top Answer:As a solution, Sophos UTM offers a lot of functionality, it scales well, and the stability and performance are quite good. The most valuable features for me are their web and email filtering. I would… more »
    Ranking
    Unranked
    In Firewalls
    2nd
    out of 59 in Firewalls
    Views
    126,666
    Comparisons
    92,626
    Reviews
    64
    Average Words per Review
    574
    Rating
    8.4
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    FortiGate 60b, FortiGate 60c, FortiGate 80c, FortiGate 50b, FortiGate 200b, FortiGate 110c, FortiGate
    Learn More
    Overview
    Check Point UTM-1 delivers proven, best-in-class security ideal for use in industrial Ethernet and SCADA environments. Robust performance and central management provide unmatched value in a simple, all-in-one solution.

    Fortinet FortiGate enhances network security, prevents unauthorized access, and offers robust firewall protection. Valued features include advanced threat protection, reliable performance, and a user-friendly interface. It improves efficiency, streamlines processes, and boosts collaboration, providing valuable insights for informed decision-making and growth.

    Sample Customers
    AccessIT Group Inc., Accuvant, Cadre Computer Resources Inc., Compuquip Technologies Inc, Dimension Data North America Inc., Forsythe Solutions Group, Gotham Technology Group LLC, GuidePoint Security LLC, Iovations, IPS
    1. Amazon Web Services 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Cisco 5. Dell 6. HP 7. Oracle 8. Verizon 9. AT&T 10. T-Mobile 11. Sprint 12. Vodafone 13. Orange 14. BT Group 15. Telstra 16. Deutsche Telekom 17. Comcast 18. Time Warner Cable 19. CenturyLink 20. NTT Communications 21. Tata Communications 22. SoftBank 23. China Mobile 24. Singtel 25. Telus 26. Rogers Communications 27. Bell Canada 28. Telkom Indonesia 29. Telkom South Africa 30. Telmex 31. Telia Company 32. Telkom Kenya
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Security Firm23%
    Energy/Utilities Company8%
    Pharma/Biotech Company8%
    Insurance Company8%
    REVIEWERS
    Comms Service Provider16%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization20%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Comms Service Provider8%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business45%
    Midsize Enterprise27%
    Large Enterprise27%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business48%
    Midsize Enterprise23%
    Large Enterprise30%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business27%
    Midsize Enterprise32%
    Large Enterprise41%
    Buyer's Guide
    Firewalls
    February 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls. Updated: February 2024.
    763,955 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 2 reviews while Fortinet FortiGate is ranked 2nd in Firewalls with 67 reviews. Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiGate is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] writes "Great firewalls, VPN, and Intrusion prevention capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiGate writes "Efficient, user-friendly, and affordable". Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Fortinet FortiGate is most compared with Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX and Check Point NGFW.

    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.