We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Fortinet FortiGate 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."The product's initial setup phase is easy."
"Forcepoint's stability is satisfactory, for the most part."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"The most valuable feature is SD-WAN."
"The people we deal with is a local partner in Cambodia and we can get good support from them."
"The most valuable feature is controlling the traffic and the logging. They have real-time logins for traffic logs. Troubleshooting was very easy for me."
"Technical support has been quite helpful in the past."
"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."
"Some of the valuable features are the firewall, IPS, web filter, and gateway capabilities. Additionally, it is easy to use and flexible."
"I like Fortinet's cloud management. It allows me to manage all my devices in different branches for three cloud accounts. Even though I use on-prem devices, I can manage everything on the cloud."
"The network security and cloud security are most valuable."
"The inspection and web security features are most valuable."
"The interface is very user-friendly and I like it very much."
"The CLI is robust and powerful, enabling rapid, consistent changes via SSH."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"FortiGate has a strong security topic which allows all of the Fortinet devices to communicate and share information which makes their security more powerful."
"Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall could change its interface, allowing standard or direct connect modes to be configured."
"Its management center should be easier to use. The management interface of Forcepoint is unique and a little bit different from some of the firewall solutions on which people might have worked before. Sometimes, the customers say that it is not very friendly, and we help them with how to use this management interface. It just takes a little bit of time, and after some time, it gets easy to manage or use. It is quite similar to Palo Alto, Fortinet, and legacy Juniper solutions. Their support should be faster. We have received complaints that they are not responding fast, which is not good for the vendor and us."
"We feel the product's technical support could be better, as this relates to the solution itself, to the installation of the product, and to having a proper understanding of the case."
"Something that I've noticed that Forcepoint lacks, is the training that they offer to their end-customers"
"The endpoint protection capabilities of the product are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Forcepoint is a little difficult to configure compared to its competitors."
"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."
"The solution's support could use improvement."
"Some of the features in the graphical user interface do not work, which requires that we used the command-line-interface."
"The performance could be a bit better. Right now, I find it to be lacking. Having good performance is very important for our work."
"To some degree, it's almost a question as to why some of this stuff isn't simpler. For example, for an AP deployment, while it's integrated, the number of steps that you have to go through in order to get the AP up, seems like a lot."
"Fortinet already improved FortiGate, but in the current market, many brands of security devices have improved together. Fortinet still needs to catch up with market standards. Fortinet is lacking in features in comparison to competitors."
"From a reporting perspective, there's room for improvement. They're providing FortiAnalyzer through which one can get some enhancements, but the visibility and reporting still need slight improvement."
"One area for improvement is the performance on bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"We'd like more management across other integrations."
"Fortinet needs more memory to save the log files. We need it to save the logs on the hardware and not in the cloud. I know this feature is available in FortiCloud, but if we need this log locally, it is not available."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 40 reviews while Fortinet FortiGate is ranked 2nd in Firewalls with 306 reviews. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6, while Fortinet FortiGate 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 Fortinet FortiGate writes "It's a reliable solution that's easy to install and cheaper than competitors ". 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 Fortinet FortiGate is most compared with Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX and WatchGuard Firebox. See our Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs. Fortinet FortiGate report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors, best Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions vendors, and best WAN Edge 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.
