We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and OPNsense 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."Good load balancing feature."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is good to use, and most importantly, the pricing. The customer especially likes the discount when they trade up or something like that."
"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 pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the rules and quality of service."
"This solution has solid UTM features combined with a nice GUI."
"The interface is very user-friendly and I like it very much."
"The SD-WAN is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support."
"We like the scalability of Forcepoint because with the Forcepoint NGFW solution, we can scale anything. The solution has central management, so we can manage all the branches and devices centrally in one controller."
"The central security management center and the content management center are very good."
"The simplicity of the solution is its most valuable asset. It's very user-friendly."
"One of the most valuable features is having the ability to cluster multiple firewalls even if they are different versions."
"The most valuable feature is the console management."
"I have found that Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is easy to use, highly secure, and the main VPN tunnel is created automatically which is a benefit."
"The people we deal with is a local partner in Cambodia and we can get good support from them."
"The graphic user interface is very good and it is user-friendly which makes the product easy-to-use."
"I have found the solution has some great features overall, such as guest access capabilities, dashboards, and ease of use. There is plenty of documentation and support and it has the plugins that I needed."
"It's open source."
"The most valuable feature is the Dual WAN in OPNSense, which offers advanced capabilities."
"URL blocking, Wireguard, Tail Scale, Engine Blocker, and VPN are the most valuable features for me."
"We have been operating here in our lab for several months, and everything appears to be extremely stable."
"The most valuable features in OPNsense are reporting and visibility."
"What I like the most about OPNsense is that it offers an easy-to-use dashboard for device management and control."
"One area for improvement is the performance on the bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"Application management can be improved."
"Tunnel flapping was one of the major things I had seen wherein your internet link remains but your VPN tunnel is down. However, since I got a fix from the TAC team, I have not noticed it, but the customer complained a few times that they couldn't access the internet because of this problem."
"I don't like that anything more than very basic reporting is not included."
"They need faster serviceability and more security features."
"The price of FortiGate should be reduced because there are some other leading products that are cheaper."
"I need user-behavior analytics, to find threat scenarios from inside the organization, insider attacks. That would be very helpful for us. In addition, I would like next-generation features for small and medium businesses. These businesses require UTM, all in one product. Fortinet must include it."
"This solution would be improved with the inclusion of custom reporting."
"Something that I've noticed that Forcepoint lacks, is the training that they offer to their end-customers"
"It's a complicated firewall. Until you come to know the firewall inducers, most people don't like the firewall because the components for the firewall are a little bit complex. User-friendliness is a little bit tough. It needs to be user-friendly when creating policies, and pushing policies. Committing takes more time compared to Palo Alto."
"They should have a local vendor who can provide support. Most of the support is overseas, so the time zones can be a problem."
"They need to work on stability, it has not been the best in our experience."
"The ability to dynamically change policies could be improved."
"Making this solution easier to use would be an improvement."
"When it comes to a complex deployment, the rules, firewall features, SD-WAN core features, and auto-scaling can cause the device to be not quite stable."
"The IPS solution could be more reliable."
"The interface of the solution is an area with shortcomings."
"The scalability needs improvement."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
"The ability to set the VPN IP address would be a welcome addition."
"The reporting part could be better."
"There are some add-ons that need enhancements to make management easier for users, especially the reporting features. Some reports don't show the level of detail I'm looking for, and I've had trouble installing certain add-ons, especially for Internet bandwidth shaping within my company."
"OPNsense showed me some problems when using it in different environments. The problem is integration with a virtual server."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 40 reviews while OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6, while OPNsense is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Provides decent protection for the LAN but complicated interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point NGFW, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense, whereas OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and IPFire. See our Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs. OPNsense 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.
