We performed a comparison between OPNsense and Sangfor NGAF 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 CLI and GUI do a good job of putting a lot at your fingertips."
"Easy to implement, and it is also reliable."
"The usage in general is pretty good."
"It is a safe product."
"The most valuable feature is the policy routing and application control."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the different types of profiling. It has been the most effective for me. The WAF and the antivirus profile are the most effective in network protection."
"The technical support is great."
"The feature I like most is the SD-WAN. It allows you to manage more than one ISP at the same time. And there is a high-availability mode, so if one of your ISPs is down, you still have a backup."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features is the network checking. Additionally, the firewall and web filtering functionalities are highly useful."
"The most valuable feature is the Dual WAN in OPNSense, which offers advanced capabilities."
"The most valuable features in OPNsense are reporting and visibility."
"The initial implementation process is simple."
"What I like best about OPNsense is that, as a firewall, it's pretty good. I'm quite impressed with it. I had an excellent experience with OPNsense, which helped me achieve the targets I wanted."
"We have been operating here in our lab for several months, and everything appears to be extremely stable."
"OPNsense is easy to use and open source."
"Sangfor is a good solution that provides a WAF and firewall solution. Most other vendors, like Sophos and Fortinet and Cisco, only provide one solution. That's a valuable feature of Sangfor."
"The product is very fast and reliable."
"It seems to be a durable, stable product."
"The VPN connectivity feature is really nice."
"The price versus value is good because the solution is less expensive than Sophos, Fortinet, or SonicWall."
"It's a very simple to use product."
"The most valuable features are the WAN optimization, the internet access gateway (IAG), and the central console, which allows us to implement on their firewall."
"Technical support is very good."
"Application management can be improved."
"There are just some services that aren't available. For example, the Ethernet or point-to-point protocols. They could add these services to their product offering - especially services for ISPs."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"Performance and technical support are the main issues with this solution."
"There are some license issues. Not every feature must have a separate license. There must be some of kind synergy between the license so we don't have to pay for every individual license that we would like to have."
"We had a minor problem where there was a major system upgrade on the hardware platfrom and the Mac client was not available as soon as it might have been. The PC client was available immediately, but we had to wait a month or so, before there was a mac client. I was slightly irritated that it was not ready on time, but it was eventually resolved."
"Bandwidth usage in reporting could be improved for Fortinet FortiGate."
"In the next release, maybe the documentation on how to use this solution could be improved."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
"They should improve IPEs for security in the future."
"I would like better documentation concerning the provided packages and their integration."
"The reporting part could be better."
"On the customer-side, because I'm a small business, I need a cheaper or free solution option."
"OPNsense showed me some problems when using it in different environments. The problem is integration with a virtual server."
"The interface of the solution is an area with shortcomings."
"The interface isn't so friendly user. But we have some technicians here who are quite confident with this tool. OPNSense could maybe add sets of rules so it's simpler to manage different groups with particular needs."
"Sangfor has recently increased their prices."
"An area of improvement for Sangfor NGAF could be in the field of reporting and logging."
"I would be happy if Sangfor developed a firewall designed specifically for home use, as well as for small businesses such as clinics and so on. A household version of the Sangfor firewall for your personal computer or laptop would be ideal, in my opinion."
"It does not offer any recommendations on how to mitigate or control attacks."
"The interface and user experience are horrible."
"They need to increase the number of ports in the firewall."
"The product must provide more IPS features."
"The solution has too many bugs and these slow down the implementation."
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while Sangfor NGAF is ranked 20th in Firewalls with 31 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while Sangfor NGAF is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor NGAF writes "Affordable, easy to configure firewall with fast, responsive support". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and IPFire, whereas Sangfor NGAF is most compared with Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW and Fortinet FortiGate-VM. See our OPNsense vs. Sangfor NGAF 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.
