We performed a comparison between Netgate pfSense and SonicWall NSa 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.
"Whenever we raise a complaint with FortiGate, their response and resolution times are minimal."
"We can detect any attack of viruses or malware at the first point of contact."
"The Fortinet FortiGate local partners were good. I did not have direct contact with Fortinet support."
"The signature database and zero-day detection are Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features."
"It's very fast and easy to configure."
"The most important features with FortiGate are the web filter and application controls. We can control our internet usage and use the web filter for application purposes."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ability to work in proxy mode, which other solutions, such as Palo Alto cannot. There are some features that are better that come at no extra license or subscriptions cost, such as basic SD-WAN. The DLT is useful, other solutions have the same feature too, such as Palo Alto."
"It's user-friendly and easy to operate."
"The redundancy and scalability ARE very nice."
"The built-in open VPN and the VPN Client Export are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"The interface is straightforward and easy to use."
"For everyday tasks, we just get alerts. It's anything that's suspicious, including from our Netgate. So, it's part of how we maintain cybersecurity in our school. This is working alongside our endpoint security solution."
"Improved service performance and availability through redundancy."
"The ability to create a VPN allows me to monitor branch offices from a central location."
"I have found the firewall portion for the blocking most valuable."
"Good basic firewall features."
"The product is simple to manage."
"Content Filtering and sandboxing are valuable features."
"The stability is better than other products."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the GUI pre-filtering and the ATP (advanced threat protection)."
"It is able to fulfill my requirements. It protects our network environment. It has control over IPS, signatures, and it can also manage bandwidth and mapping. It is also stable and has good support."
"I really like the performance; there are no delays and no latency, which is a unique quality in firewalls nowadays."
"We can do the hosting and security all under one box. The UTM is a good feature."
"It is a brilliant product. It is a Unified Threat Management (UTM) system. It has got about 11 security services that take care of your perimeter security. It takes care of any kind of cyber threats that could come in. It takes care of creating VPNs between two SonicWalls instantly and very easily. It has got spyware in it as well as a firewall. It has also got a gateway antivirus and an application firewall that can block things from outside."
"Application management can be improved."
"When we cluster the two Fortinet FortiGate boxes together we have some issues."
"In the future, I would like to see improvements made to cloud-based management."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"There are some complex administration tasks in their administration portal. That needs to be improved."
"Some of the features in the graphical user interface do not work, which requires that we used the command-line-interface."
"The room for improvement is about the global delivery time period. Usually I need to wait for almost one month to deliver it overseas. So if you can shorten the deliver time it'd be great."
"The pricing could be a bit better, especially when you consider how they have the most basic offering priced."
"This product needs improvements with respect to reporting and auditing."
"Other solutions provide more scope for growth. For instance, we can have only 10 to 20 employees on VPN, but other solutions can support more users. We also have more capabilities to increase the performance of the solution."
"The solution could use better reporting. They need to offer more of it in general. Right now, the graphics aren't the best. If you need to provide a report to a manager, for example, it doesn't look great. They need to make it easier to understand and give users the ability to customize them."
"pfSense has some limitations in detecting site sessions. We want to control internet usage based on sites and their content, and pfSense doesn't perform this function."
"pfSense could improve by having a sandboxing feature that I have seen in SonicWall. However, maybe it is available I am not aware of it."
"The user interface can be improved to make it easier to add more features. And pfSense could be better integrated with other solutions, like antivirus."
"The technical support needs to be improved."
"As an open-source solution, there are so many loopholes happening within the product. By design, no one is taking ownership of it, and that is worrisome to me."
"One issue with the solution is that no authorization or authentication features exist."
"Vendor support needs improvement. The frequency of time and support should be increased."
"A room for improvement in SonicWall NSa is the log server because it could be more user-friendly compared to Fortinet and Palo Alto Networks. My company has many rule sets up for review, so sometimes, my team needs to use Excel for filtering, but the UI cannot support the Excel function."
"It is very modular and with native resources which are much lower than its competitors."
"The reporting and monitoring are a bit complex and should be easier in SonicWall NSa because other firewalls I have experienced have been more simple, such as Palo Alto. We are able to receive a clear view of our network. As a general user with little experience, it would be difficult for them to handle."
"Initially, it may be difficult for some people to learn and become acquainted with it."
"SonicWall needs to work on SD-WAN."
"The filter settings are confusing and overly complicated. The user interface can be improved."
Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews while SonicWall NSa is ranked 19th in Firewalls with 80 reviews. Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6, while SonicWall NSa is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall NSa writes "Great performance and security with reasonable pricing". Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, KerioControl, Sophos UTM and Cisco Secure Firewall, whereas SonicWall NSa is most compared with SonicWall TZ, Meraki MX, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall and WatchGuard Firebox. See our Netgate pfSense vs. SonicWall NSa 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.
