We performed a comparison between A10 Networks Thunder ADC and Kemp LoadMaster based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is user-friendly and the CLA troubleshooting is easier compared to other solutions."
"The DNS application firewall and load balancing are very valuable."
"The ease of use is very good. It's very robust. It just sits and works."
"The Global Server Load Balancing (GSLB) is simple to use."
"It's a very friendly solution, easy to configure and it's very flexible."
"The SLB and GSLB load balancing are the most valuable features. They meet our need to do server-side load balancing and global site load balancing so we can distribute traffic, not only intra-data center, but inter-data center."
"For the past two and a half years, we have not had a need to open a tech support ticket. It is really stable. In the past, our experience with tech support was that they were extremely helpful."
"We do have the option of creating virtual chassis, so that gives it a bit more security. If we find an application which is not going to play well in the main pool, we can easily create a virtual chassis and have that application in that virtual chassis. With the virtual chassis we can also create system partitions and have a test system for test applications, and have the others elsewhere."
"One of the most valuable features I like is the ability to block specific cipher suites like RC4, and older protocols like SSL 3.0."
"The feature I find most valuable is load balancing with different algorithms."
"It has been functional. We don't have any outages."
"Managing and maintaining multiple servers is done in a single place."
"The most valuable features for us are the Load Balancing and Web Application Firewall, as we have a lot of web applications."
"It is an easy-to-use, user-friendly interface, and you can set up a new VIP in a couple of minutes."
"The security features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The configuration is really easy and the web portal is self-explanatory."
"The user interface is not as pretty as it could be."
"The tool's load-balancing feature should improve."
"They need to make the user interface (GUI) a bit more usable and intuitive. Some features can be a little difficult to find at times. Sometimes, the workflow in the GUI doesn't match the workflow of an actual workflow. E.g., if I want to create a load balancer application, sometimes you've got to do things a bit out of order in the GUI in order to make it work right."
"There are competitors that have more features."
"There is room for improvement in the upgrading process. Sometimes we have to contact A10 for verification of some stuff."
"We are starting to do a lot with containers and how the solution hooks into Kubernetes that we haven't explored. I'm hoping that they have a lot of hooks into Kubernetes. That would be the part for improvement: Marketing use cases with containers."
"The interface and integrated custom applications can be a bit difficult."
"Currently, the solution's WAF features are fewer. They should consider increasing their WAF features."
"The only thing I have struggled with is setting up automatic backups."
"The GUI is rather technical and complex, so it could be improved by making it simpler and more user-friendly."
"If there is anything that needs to be updated, the GUI can get a refresh to make it look more like 2020, although it is just a cosmetic change."
"It lacks an officially supported, well-written SCOM Management Pack."
"It would be nice if the historical metrics were easily exportable from the interface."
"The cost of the GEO upgrade is not cost-prohibitive but it's something that would be a nice add-in, out of the box."
"The product could be improved by making the SSL Offloading easier."
"Certificate installations could be simplified and modernized, and allowed to be monitored for expirations/issues."
A10 Networks Thunder ADC is ranked 12th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 21 reviews while Kemp LoadMaster is ranked 7th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 48 reviews. A10 Networks Thunder ADC is rated 8.4, while Kemp LoadMaster is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of A10 Networks Thunder ADC writes "With iRule or aFleX scripting, you can influence the complete packet instead of just a few bytes or bits". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kemp LoadMaster writes "Reliable, easy to set up, and can increase your security score". A10 Networks Thunder ADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Radware Alteon and NGINX Plus, whereas Kemp LoadMaster is most compared with HAProxy, NGINX Plus, Fortinet FortiADC, Citrix NetScaler and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway. See our A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs. Kemp LoadMaster report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.