We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls 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."Consolidated our network environment at all locations, but mainly at our datacenter."
"It's an easy solution to set up."
"The web filtering feature and the intrusion protection system are the most valuable. It is a resilient appliance. I never had an issue with it in terms of any security breaches."
"The integration with Active Directory is one of the good features. Most of the customers are now looking for the Single Sign-on feature. So, being able to integrate Active Directory with the firewall is useful. It is also easy."
"I like that you are able to manage FortiGate from the FortiManager to create a more centralized environment."
"Our project needs to link two sides through the internet. One of these was in Cairo and the other in another city. We used FortiGate as the integrating solution between the two locations, i.e. the Fortinet 30E & 100E."
"A strong point of FortiGate is the graphical interface is complete and easy to use."
"It's user-friendly and easy to operate."
"The simplicity of the solution is its most valuable asset. It's very user-friendly."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Technical support has been quite helpful in the past."
"I don't have anything bad to say about the product. I absolutely love it."
"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."
"Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is very simple, easy to use, and flexible."
"It provides decent protection for the LAN, especially in run mode."
"I like the IPS. IPS is the master feature. I depend on the firewall and sandbox."
"URL filtering and WildFire features are most valuable. It is very user-friendly. It is a very solid product, and it definitely works."
"This solution not only provides better security than flat VLAN segments but allows easy movement through the lifecycle of the server."
"I like the architecture because it separates the management plan process and the data plan process."
"The key aspect of this solution that provides the most value is its next-gen capabilities, which represented a significant change for us."
"Everything is easy in Palo Alto Networks NG Firewall. It is very stable, easy to configure, and easy to upgrade. It is also very easy to create custom policies and applications. Everything can be done with the click of a button. It is also good for the protection of web services. Nowadays, they have a rather new DNS security feature, which is pretty good and functional. We did a one-month trial, and it is the best product for the firewall network."
"It's one of the best products I've worked with. It's typically a market leader on Gartner. It's a very respected brand."
"The most valuable feature is WildFire, which blocks sophisticated attacks and distinguishes it from other traditional firewall functions."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to deeply analyze the connection or connection type."
"The solution needs to improve its integration with cybersecurity."
"I could not configure sFlow from the FortiGate graphical user interface. I realized that the sFlow configuration is available only from the CLI, and discovered that sFlow is not supported on virtual interfaces, such as VDOM links, IPsec, or GRE."
"The user interface could be improved."
"Bandwidth usage in reporting could be improved for Fortinet FortiGate."
"Its price could be better."
"There are some complex administration tasks in their administration portal. That needs to be improved."
"I think there could be more QoS features"
"It does not have key authentication for admin access."
"They should have a local vendor who can provide support. Most of the support is overseas, so the time zones can be a problem."
"Configuration is not easy because it has an old-fashioned interface. The configuration interface is highly complex, and it's been the same for years. They have to change the interface."
"The network interface could be better, and it could be cheaper."
"The optimization is not really ready. If you want very good optimization, you have to add it to the network."
"Management could be better. They can improve the management. I think all our customers can't accept firewalls that have standalone management. So, they prefer Fortinet or Palo Alto. But overall, inspection and other features are working fine."
"The interface is complicated. It's difficult to locate all the necessary menus and functions."
"I would like to see more sizing in the next release, and the roadmap should be clear."
"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."
"As things are evolving, we want to make sure that Palo Alto is able to keep up with what is going on outside. They should continue to do more intelligence-related enhancements and integrate with some of the other security tools. We want to have a more intelligent toolset down the road."
"We're working with the entry-level appliances, so I don't know what the higher-end ones are like, however, on the entry-level models I would say commit speeds need to be improved."
"We would like to see the external dynamic list for this solution improved. The current version does not automatically block malicious IP addresses, which would be very useful."
"Need improvement with their logs, especially the command line interface."
"In Mexico, Palo Alto's discounts are significantly lower than Cisco's. They are also more expensive – about 15% or 20% – than Cisco, but their platforms are very similar."
"The tool's central management system is complicated, making it challenging to manage multiple devices centrally. Individually, the firewalls are easy to use and manage. I'd like to see better central management features in the next release. They've introduced some, but I haven't tried them yet, so I can't say how effective they are. However, having a single management interface would be a big improvement."
"Its stability can be better. Their technical response from the support side can also be better."
"I would like them to improve their GUI interface, making it more user-friendly."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 41 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 164 reviews. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. 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 Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". 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 Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense. See our Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls 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.