We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiGate, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The GUI is good."
"I really like the captive portal feature for our guest network. It has nice VLAN features in terms of separating our network. The anti-virus is also good."
"The most valuable features are that it is very simple to configure and to manage."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"Fortinet FortiGate is scalable for our users. Right now, we have almost 70 users. We do not have any plan to increase our usage of FortiGate. For maintaining the firewall solution, one staff member is enough."
"Reliability is the best feature. We faced some issues when we were setting it up, but the service, portal, and administration are good."
"It has improved our organization with control data."
"I only deal with it from a security analyst's point of view. I don't really get into the features of the actual FortiGate. From the security point of view, it works, and it does its job."
"The solution is very secure, and its technical support is on point."
"The IPS module is my favorite because of the security advantage reached with a few clicks and its automatic updates."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The initial setup is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the integration within the environment, with centralized reporting."
"It's almost perfect. It's very stable. We don't have many hardware issues."
"The standard features, including the filtering, are quite good. All the basic features are pretty useful for us."
"The ROI is good since I get free support."
"Most of the features in Palo Alto are very valuable."
"I like that they are more stable than the previous ones, and they allow a lot of other features."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls have a Single Pass Parallel Processing (SP3) Architecture, which has a different kind of code doing the work. It increases the packet processing rate. Whereas, without the SP3 Architecture, you are waiting for each job to complete, even if you have 100 jobs assigned."
"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."
"Operationally, it is easier, and the manageability and their security features are good."
"In general, its performance and ease of use are the most valuable. Its performance is good, stable, and reliable. The user interface is friendly and easy to use. Customers find it easy to work with and easy to learn."
"We have found the DPI ability to understand web applications and build access rules on web application categories first to be a great feature."
"I like the navigation of the general Panorama solution. I can easily navigate around and get to the thing I need. I'm not wasting time trying to find something."
"They should improve the interface to make it more user-friendly."
"Security is a continuous process. In every product, there is a requirement for improvement. Its pricing should also be improved according to Indian market requirements. They must also improve on the reporting part. Its reporting can be more precise. If we can get a real-time report in a specific format, it will be helpful for customers to know about the current status of their security."
"We had some issues in the beginning while setting it up, but after doing the firmware update, it is working fine."
"Their software support needs improvement. I would prefer to have better support for bug fixes. Sometimes, we open a ticket, and it is very difficult to get a solution. Specifically, we are not at all happy with their support for load balancing."
"I think there could be more QoS features"
"Its filtering is sometimes too precise or strict. We sometimes have to bypass and authorize some of the sites, but they get blocked. We know that they are trusted sites, but they are blocked, and we don't know why."
"Application management can be improved."
"Its price could be better."
"We have encountered certain issues with the bandwidth in respect of the security layer."
"I have worked on some of the largest and smallest solutions that Fortinet sells and they all scale really well."
"Technical support could be improved."
"I don't have any specific improvements to suggest, but perhaps the pricing could be enhanced. Regarding updates, more frequent updates would be appreciated. FortiGate-VM is currently focused on providing very good firmware updates, automation, and top-notch features. It stands as a great product for now. Based on our needs and the vulnerabilities we've encountered due to various downloads, I suggest integrating with Kaspersky Gateway. This integration would involve scanning and inspecting both official emails and spam emails. Our customer has successfully worked with Kaspersky Gateway, and overall, the integration has been effective."
"There should be a bit more automation."
"Now they do have the ability to pop up a command line, which is nice, however, the fact that you can't do everything within the GUI is probably a problem."
"Sizing can be challenging for customers interested in using Fortinet FortiGate-VM."
"The price and licensing of the solution can be better."
"Its stability can be better. Their technical response from the support side can also be better."
"Customers don't want to buy extra things for extra capabilities"
"I would like the option to be able to block the traffic from a specific country in a few clicks."
"The built-in machine learning features provide some automation, but I think there should be an option for manual review because nothing replaces the human eye."
"It would be better to have more tools to control Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. We don't have too many tools to access Palo Alto. For example, the IT team doesn't have access to it. We can see it physically and see if it's running or not. We need to contact a special team to receive that information. I would also like to see more reporting in the next release."
"The price of the solution is very high."
"PA-220 Next-Generation Firewall would be perfect if it has spam filtering."
"The stability, scalability for enterprise-level organizations, and technical documentation have room for improvement."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
In the best tradition of these questions, Feature-wise both are quite similar, but each has things it's better at, it kind of depends what you value most.
PA is good at app control, web filtering and such like, they have always been top of the pile there. The GUI is very good, and their product is very user-focused.
Fortinet is good for scalability and predictable high throughput (ASICs in the hardware), and useful things like authentication flexibility, CLI config (if you have any networking/Cisco people, they always seem to prefer CLI over GUI) and have better OT features, maybe relevant to your manufacturing use?
Fortinet seem to have a broader integration offering with their security fabric than PA do, plus they can do Fortinet-based wifi, switching, etc. Depends if you are prepared to go all-in with a single vendor.
Hi,
Both FT and PA have compelling features for large Enterprises. I would like to add a few good points about Fortinetwhich might be helpful ( from my 13 years of engagement with them as Distributor and Partner)
Fortinet:
Have higher throughput; which comes with competitive rates
Wide range of models to select to meet your requirement, without spending heavliy
Outstanding customer support and very active customer care team
Easly available skilled resources from the channel for deployment and post-implementation support
Regards
Abhilash
Hello. The question is what you are going to have as a result of application