We performed a comparison between Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] and Netgate pfSense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."Fortinet FortiGate is a scalable solution."
"The initial installation is very straightforward."
"Fortinet FortiGate is stable. It's used across all the countries, this is the way most multinationals run their system."
"One of the valuable features is a standardized OS."
"The most valuable features are SD-WAN, application control, IPS control, and FortiSandbox."
"What's most important is the ease of use."
"The most valuable feature is the VDOM, which allows the customer to have multiple firewalls in a single campus."
"The reporting and monitoring are very good."
"The filtering was very good."
"It provides visibility and drives organizational security."
"The databases and its signatures are its most important features."
"It safeguards against cyber attacks."
"Firewalls help us a lot in controlling traffic on our network and preventing unauthorized access."
"The solution is very robust."
"The most outstanding feature is being able to centralize each of the functions in a single device."
"The UTM platform has been the most valuable."
"I like pfSense's reports and how I can control access to the policies on the firewall."
"We like the fact that the product is open-source. It's free to use. There are no costs associated with it."
"The gain in performance and security from configuring the VPN connections was significant."
"Centralized administration with multiple services, which allows for execution in several important functionalities of information security."
"Stability has been excellent. We have experienced no issues; it never fails."
"The product’s documentation is good."
"The solution is very robust."
"A valuable feature is that the solution is open source."
"The UTM filtering needs improvement."
"There are some license issues. Not every feature must have a separate license. There must be some of kind synergy between the license so we don't have to pay for every individual license that we would like to have."
"The performance and speed are aspects of the solution that could always be improved upon."
"We had a minor problem where there was a major system upgrade on the hardware platfrom and the Mac client was not available as soon as it might have been. The PC client was available immediately, but we had to wait a month or so, before there was a mac client. I was slightly irritated that it was not ready on time, but it was eventually resolved."
"The support costs and licensing are sometimes so expensive."
"Compared to some other products, the DLP is not at par for the moment."
"I would like Fortinet to add more automation to FortiGate."
"They need to improve their technical support."
"I am not able to see a demo."
"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."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"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."
"Some features that could be improved are advanced threat protection, sandboxing, and vulnerability management."
"The interface needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"Could be simplified for new users."
"ClamAV AntiVirus can cause some crashes. That service should be improved."
"This solution is good for small businesses but it is not as stable as other competitors such as Fortinet."
"It needs better parsing of logs. At the moment, you have to use an external server for this if you want a deeper analysis."
"The GUI could use more “bells and whistles”. It's got plenty of info for a Sysadmin but some people like shiny things."
"The interface is not very shiny and attractive."
"Perhaps the documentation is not clear and because it is supported in the community there is no basic documentation."
"The Netgate forums and community don’t provide extensive discussions and topics related to every pfSense service."
Earn 20 points
Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 19 reviews while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is rated 8.2, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. 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 Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, Sophos UTM, KerioControl and Cisco Secure Firewall.
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.