We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and pfSense based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security provides valuable features like VPN Blade, IPS Blade, URL filtering, and Applications Control Blade. pfSense is appreciated for its capacity to block IP addresses, user-friendly dashboards, and open-source nature.
Check Point could enhance its support system, cluster creation on AWS, data protection visibility, DLP feature, user interface, integration with other security solutions, cost reduction, documentation, and on-prem deployment flexibility. pfSense could improve instructional videos, stability, mobile application, GUI usability, updates, threat handling, FIPs compliance, log analysis, VPN capacity, documentation, user-friendliness, configuration processes, and SD-WAN integration.
Service and Support: Some customers appreciate the technical support provided by Check Point, while others express dissatisfaction with response time and global support. pfSense's customer service garners both positive and negative reviews. Some users commend the technical support they receive, while others rely on community resources for assistance.
Ease of Deployment: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is praised for its easy, simple, and straightforward initial setup. Users find it interactive, user-friendly, and effortless to configure. However, it may require technical expertise and proper guidelines from customer support. pfSense is generally regarded as easy and straightforward to set up, with a simple installation process. The timeframe for completion varies from as little as 15 minutes to a few days, depending on the user's familiarity with firewall and network concepts.
Pricing: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is recognized for its high price, however, it provides strong security measures and good value. pfSense is an open-source option that offers reasonable pricing and no extra expenses. However, there is a lack of available information concerning the exact costs associated with pfSense's licensing.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security provides improved performance and benefits for organizations, resulting in a higher ROI range of 80% to 85%. pfSense is highly regarded for its cost-effectiveness and affordability, enabling substantial savings.
Comparison Results: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is the preferred option when compared to pfSense. Users find the initial setup of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security to be straightforward, and user-friendly. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security offers more valuable features including VPN, IPS, URL filtering, and Applications Control Blade, which are highly appreciated for their compliance, intrusion protection, and productivity enhancement.
"Our security improved from being able to put in rules and close off unwanted traffic."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ease of use and the UI. It has always provided me with what I needed. I have no need for additional costs that other solutions have, such as Sophos."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"Its performance in fulfilling our requirements has been satisfactory."
"The customization potential is quite impressive."
"This solution has solid UTM features combined with a nice GUI."
"The base firewall features are quite valuable to us."
"It is easy to use and performs very well."
"It is a good-to-use tool that is also flexible."
"The 24/7 online customer support services enhance effective operations and provide quick services in case of a system failure."
"The most valuable feature is the centralized dashboard, which is used for managing all of the Check Point Security Gateways."
"When browsing, it scans sites to ensure that they are safe and that no harm can be caused."
"I find it really useful that CloudGuard supports all the main players on the Public Clouds market including AWS, GCP, and Azure, as well as some exotic ones like Alibaba Cloud, Oracle Cloud, and IBM Cloud."
"The IPS, application and URL filtering, as well as Identity Awareness, are all very valuable features."
"The central management feature is a big plus, allowing us to manage both local and cloud gateways from one platform."
"The solution provides a centralized management console for easy administration and monitoring of security policies and events, making it easy for the security team."
"Firewall system for small, medium, and large data networks. It allows you to provide security to your environment: DMZ networks, LAN, WAN, etc."
"Open source and support are valuable. I have community support."
"pfSense allows us to spread the hours of connection and do the filtering on the pfSense site."
"I have found the firewall portion for the blocking most valuable."
"The solution is fairly scalable when it comes to integrating with other applications and data sets."
"A very stable product that lasts over time, easy to understand, and administer."
"The solution is very easy to use and configure."
"This solution has helped our organization by protecting our network from attacks."
"Some of the web policy reports could be improved."
"It would be ideal if they had some sort of GUI interface for troubleshooting and diagnostics."
"Technical support is good but the response time could be faster."
"Fortinet FortiGate is not very easy to use. The navigation could be improved to make it easier to use."
"The price of FortiGate should be reduced because there are some other leading products that are cheaper."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a stable solution. However, my issue is the performance only. When I use all the profiles, this affects the performance. From the beginning, I should have had a better sizing of the box."
"The support structure needs to be improved because every time we contact them, there is a delay in the response."
"I don't like that anything more than very basic reporting is not included."
"In case the device is inaccessible due to some issue such as CPU or memory, there is no separate port or hardware partition provided for troubleshooting purposes."
"Our biggest complaint concerns the high resource usage for IDP/IPS, as we cannot turn on all of the features even with new hardware."
"Its price is fair, but it can be more favorable."
"The solution's integration with cloud providers has seen significant development in the past months, but there is room for improvement for better integration."
"There is room for improvement regarding the technical support provided."
"While today we can manage some scopes, there are still some segments in the OSI layer we cannot manage."
"It can be difficult to install properly without prior training"
"Micro-Segmentation functionality for EAST-WEST traffic is not native and requires integration with a third-party OEM."
"The usage reports can be better."
"This solution is good for small businesses but it is not as stable as other competitors such as Fortinet."
"Also, simplifying the rules for the GeoIP. Making it simpler to understand would be an improvement."
"The solution could improve by having centralized management and API support online."
"In terms of areas of improvement, the interface seemed like it had a lot. The GUI interface that I had gotten into was rather elaborate. I don't know if they could zero in on some markets and potentially for small, medium businesses specifically, give them a stripped-down version of the GUI for pfSense."
"It requires more attention to provide a better alternative for open source to small government or educational institutions with reduced budgets in terms of technology."
"The VPN feature of the solution could improve by adding better functionality and providing easier configure ability."
"It needs better parsing of logs. At the moment, you have to use an external server for this if you want a deeper analysis."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 121 reviews while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "Highly reliable, great visibility, and centralized management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Firewall and Fortinet FortiGate-VM, whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, KerioControl, Sophos UTM and Cisco Secure Firewall. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Netgate pfSense 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.