We performed a comparison between Check Point NGFW and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on our users’ reviews in four categories. Our conclusion is presented below.
Comparison Results: Our users feel Check Point NGFW is the better choice for NG Firewalls. Users appreciate its unique multi-layer, multi-blade approach. Additionally, the central management station allows users to manage everything in one place, helping to improve overall performance. The great price, support, and performance make this a great choice.
"Security, SD-WAN, and Streetscape are valuable features."
"FortiGate is very simple to manage and easy to use."
"In terms of security, we have not experienced any security flaws or loopholes, and it has proven to be quite stable."
"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."
"Its stability is the most valuable."
"The most valuable features are that it is very simple to configure and to manage."
"The web filtering facility and application control are the most valuable features from the point of view of our clients. The VPN feature is also quite popular amongst our clients. Two-factor authentication is one of the good features in Fortinet. These features are important for the current scenario of security. Security has become a necessity nowadays. With cyber-attacks becoming more common, protecting an organization's data is one of the major tasks. It is also very stable and scalable, and it is very straightforward to configure. Their technical support is also good."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the SD-WAN and their IP4 policy."
"The Check Point architecture and packet are very good."
"The Identity-Based Inspection Control gives us the ability to leverage the organization’s Microsoft AD, LDAP, RADIUS, and Cisco pxGrid."
"The most valuable feature of the firewall is the packet inspection. That is an amazing feature from Check Point."
"There are several ways to implement it."
"The characteristics on offer have come to give an added value under a single investment, thus offering many advantages."
"The edge security posture has dramatically improved as we can now detect and prevent threats from the public internet."
"We do not have any problems with stability."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point NGFW is the unparalleled distribution of the network traffic. The central management station they have allows you to manage everything from one place."
"The most valuable feature is the security provided by the ATP."
"The scalability is very good."
"Innovative, advanced threat protection is the most valuable feature."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls saves us time."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls' IPS is more complete and is very good. This is a user-friendly solution that is easy to install, and it provides the best protection."
"The fact that I can perform several security functions in one device at wire speed is a valuable feature. I don't have to slow down my business transactions, and I don't have to inconvenience my users with 16 different solutions. I can have it all in one box, and it protects my organization at wire speed."
"The best feature is the packet inspection; compared to solutions like Cisco and FortiGate, Palo Alto's packet inspection is much less CPU intensive, allowing it to detect threats embedded within packages more quickly and efficiently."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is pre-sales and post-sales because of the support and relationship building."
"The way everything is set up could be easier. Currently, people need a lot of experience and knowledge to administer it and to link it to devices."
"It is very expensive, and their support is not very good. I hope that their technical support will be better in the future."
"NGN, reporting and controls."
"MTBF: Hardware failure is more common when compared to SonicWall or Cisco ASA."
"They should improve high CPU and memory usage that occurs."
"The support structure needs to be improved because every time we contact them, there is a delay in the response."
"They should make the rule sets more understandable for the end user. When you're trying to explain to somebody how a computer network is secured, sometimes it's difficult for an end user or customer to understand. If there was a way to make the terminology more accessible to the end user, the set up could be easier. They should translate the technical jargon to an easily relatable and understandable conversation for the end user, the customer, that would be brilliant. Particularly in an environment where the IT structure is audited regularly, there's always pressure from the auditor to up the standards and up the security and you get your USCERT's that come out and there's a warning about this and the customer will want to lock out so much and when you apply it they run into issue where they can't search the internet or print to their remote office. Of course they can't print to your remote office, they just locked it up. They should make the language more understandable for the customer. If there's a product out there that made the jargon understandable to John Q. Public, I would buy that."
"While FortiGate is cheaper than most other solutions, we're seeing increased license renewal costs. Most of our clients are asking for more significant discounts because the price is going up."
"Currently, upgrades are quite cumbersome."
"I would like less CPU-intensive features to be introduced to replace the existing heavy-duty processes."
"My customers complain that the interface isn't user-friendly."
"One of the most complicated aspects is the VPN Configuration, which should be simplified in future releases."
"When you want to open the gateway by double-clicking on the interface, sometimes it can cause silly problems such as freezing."
"For R80.10 and above, if you want to install a hotfix, then you can't install it through the GUI. I don't know why. In the earlier days, I was able to do the installation of hotfixes through the GUI. Now, Check Point said that you have to install hotfixes through the CLI. If that issue could be resolved, then it would be great because the GUI is more handy than the CLI."
"It could be easier to access the installation of the Hostfix for VSX solutions. The CLI commands help us understand how virtual firewalls behave in terms of processor, memory, and other aspects. More graphic visualizations of CPUSE commands would be a welcome improvement, and Check Point could expand scripts to run within the solution for multiple tasks."
"There needs to be more storage space for reporting."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls don't provide a unified platform that natively integrates all security capabilities. It's missing some features for geofencing and understanding locations."
"From a documentation standpoint, there is room for improvement. Even Palo Alto says that their documentation is terrible."
"They can work on the price. They are a little bit expensive, and not all customers are able to afford this solution. Taking into consideration that there is huge competition in the market and there are multiple firewall companies that are much cheaper than them and offer almost the same features, it would be good to improve the price."
"They could improve their support and pricing and maybe integration. It's a little more expensive that Check Point but the quality is better. Integration with firewall endpoints could be better. Palo Alto does have very good malware or antivirus protection. I think they could improve on that front."
"The scalability compared to other products is not good. You need to change the box whenever you want your number of connection sessions to increase."
"The solution could be simplified."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls work slowly for vulnerability management. Its performance could be faster."
"The user interface is probably not as slick as it could be."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point NGFW is ranked 5th in Firewalls with 277 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 163 reviews. Check Point NGFW is rated 8.8, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Check Point NGFW writes "Good antivirus protection and URL filtering with very good user identification capabilities". 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". Check Point NGFW is most compared with Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Azure Firewall and OPNsense, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and Cisco Secure Firewall. See our Check Point NGFW 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.
Hi, I would suggest going for Checkpoint, the suitability depends on your specific security needs, budget constraints, network infrastructure, Integration capabilities, cloud integration, compliance and reporting, user-friendly interface but the support and the specific behavior for some solutions for routing, networking balance or specific connectivity is better known constraints, Checkpoint Multiplatform support (Open Servers Solutions) The advantages in Palo Alto (SSL Decryption, Wildfire SandBox Integration, Scalability)
Hi, I would suggest going for Check Point.
I'm with Check Point now, for more than 2 years. IPS, threat prevention, antibot identification, and antivirus notification are up to the mark. Moreover, it has a friendly user interface where anyone can create policies and work on it.