It's pretty good. The HA Features provide a good solution so far, and with Maestro it will perform better.

The scalability is very good.

The solution is highly scalable.

There is room for improvement in scalability. Adding more firewall features can impact the performance of the device, particularly in terms of processor capacity. I would rate it six out of ten. Our customers typically fall within the medium-sized business category.

Our cluster is oversized for our needs so we haven't reached any system limits in order to face an issue or at least observe its behavior. Our solution covers our current needs and can easily handle any additional load.

The solution is very scalable and easy to manage.

Scaling up is quite restricted, and the scalability needs improvement. It should be a multi-tiered and robust solution. Currently, there is a gap in the ability to seamlessly scale within the same series. I would rate it seven out of ten.

Check Point NGFW is a highly scalable solution that can be tailored to the unique needs and infrastructure of each customer. For instance, if a customer needs to secure multiple zones, they can opt for multiple firewalls. They can consolidate their network onto a single firewall by creating virtual interfaces based on VLANs. The firewall's capability to handle network traffic becomes a crucial consideration, especially when dealing with larger user bases and higher traffic volumes. In such cases, deploying multiple firewalls in a high-availability configuration becomes essential.

The solution protects the entire perimeter. Every user passes through the firewall. It is used daily. We have around eight administrators. The solution requires very little maintenance.

Due to the VSX implementation, I would conclude that it is highly scalable.

Scalability is excellent, especially the newer products.

This solution is highly scalable.

We run a pair of Gateways in HA mode, this solution has worked for us, and there have been no cases of downtime. Adding additional gateways should in theory be quite simple however for us there is no need.

The solution is highly scalable and expandable.

The scalability is relatively good, especially when considering its database capabilities. Our physical gateway hardware can comfortably handle up to nine units. When it comes to the monitoring appliance, such as the Check Point SMS (Security Management Server), it requires substantial resources. Due to limitations with supported virtual environments, we encountered challenges in expanding its capacity. I would rate its scalability 6 out of 10 since there is room for improvement in this area.

Scalability isn't necessary when upgrading infrastructure components such as database servers and application servers, as there's no need to scale the NGFW accordingly. However, if the organization has a limited number of endpoints and users, scalability isn't a priority. The need for scalability typically arises when the company offers cloud-based solutions rather than on-premises solutions.

It is very easy to scale up or scale out and Maestro can improve the scalability a lot.

The scalability is very good.

I haven't had the opportunity to scale, however, I have seen many demos of maestro architecture, and it looks awesome.

it is better when using an open server solution since some teams are limited to growth.

No issues with scalability. 

It is easy to scale both with virtual systems or by adding additional physical appliances.

The tool is scalable. If a user faces any constraints, we can upgrade the tool. The hardware is scalable. Our customers are enterprise-level businesses.

The scalability of Check Point firewalls is a notable strength. These firewalls can handle a substantial number of connections. For instance, they can manage up to one million connections on the NDSW server. Regarding its VPN capacity, it can support around 5,000 to 8,000 users per box, which is quite impressive. This scalability makes Check Point firewalls well-suited for organizations with high connection and user requirements. I would rate it eight out of ten.

We added new Check Point firewalls twice this year, and it was relatively simple. You can quickly migrate the configurations, and your new firewall is ready to go after a few adjustments to the settings.

Scaling is dependant on the size of your network. Check Point does offer a wide range of lower to high spec appliances depending on your scale set.

The scalability looks great.

We have 74 locations. We can have 10,000 users maximum via an Internet gateway. We have four data center across the world: two in USA, one in London, and one in Dubai. Passing through Check Point per location: in the USA - 5000 users, in London - 2000 users, and in Dubai - 10,000 users.

There are 12 network security engineers/consultants managing Check Point and the legacy firewall, SonicWall.

In terms of scalability, we haven't needed to expand significantly as our current setup consists of firewall checkpoints at the main site and another set at the HQ. These devices can seamlessly communicate with one another. We use SmartConsole managing system, which serves as a centralized hub for collecting and managing logs from all our Check Point Firewalls. As far as I know, the limit for management servers is five firewalls, so beyond that, additional licensing may be required to accommodate more devices.

The range of platforms is huge. It can fit every traffic requirement.

It is quite scalable. That said, it is complex to integrate cluster services from the same equipment.

Check Point NGFW allows easy and fast scalability.

There are no issues with scalability.

In Hitachi Systems in Mumbai, there are around 10 to 12 clients who are using Check Point Firewall. There are around 40 network security engineers who support Check Point Firewall in our organization for the Mumbai location, and there are multiple locations.

CkeckPoint has solutions for different sizes of companies. Therefore, the solution is scalable. The client has to choose the right solution for their needs. If you call the contact center, they can advise you on your options.

The last release, R81, is impressive, at least in these first months, having recently upgraded from R80.

We chose the solution for scalability and now we are running with all branches with a Check Point firewall. The solution is meeting our expectations.

It is good in terms of scalability.

We can easily scale the gateways with a few simple clicks. 

Check Point offers several possibilities to scale (load sharing, Maestro, and scalable platforms such as 44K or 64K appliances), however, in our case, we just replaced the appliance after a few years. If one needs real scalability, they should take a look at Maestro which is the scaling solution from Check Point.

They are very scalable. If you need more computing resources, adding more hardware is easily done.

We have a fairly small setup in the grand scheme of things, however, from what we have seen, the ability to add in new firewalls or increase the hardware spec seems very good and it would be easy to transition from older to newer hardware when the time comes.

This product is very scalable. There are a lot of different virtual and physical devices to cover any requirement in terms of sessions, performance, etc.

This is widely scalable solution.

Check Point firewalls have proved scalable and can handle increased traffic and the addition of new services without compromising performance.

The product is highly scalable especially if you integrate the orchestration solution. 

Scalability is achievable in the cloud environment. By following the appropriate processes, you can configure automated scanning and other necessary functions to ensure it.

I don't know about its scalability because I haven't had to scale. I have a flat traffic rate.

I have 500 users. It's deployed across two data centers.

It has the ability to scale depending on the product model.

It provides good scalability. Despite having only three customers, I've implemented the firewall for over a thousand users. These users are situated in factory environments, meaning there are thousands of endpoints, including those connected via VPN.

We can achieve great scalability using Check Point Quantum Gateways.

We recommend the product as it is excellent and very scalable.

There is a hardware solution for every type of throughput. It is very good that in the datasheets you get the throughput of the different types of network traffic.

It is better not to choose solutions bigger than needed, or to have some resources left over.

The tool is easily scalable. Almost 2000 people are using the product in my organization.

In terms of scalability, I would rate it seven out of ten.

The scalability is very good.

The solution is highly scalable.

The solution is scalable.

If the product is sized correctly in terms of appliances, then it is easy to scale. 

It is highly scalable on cloud and does provide customers with lot of flexibility while performing the sizing of the appliance.

The new hyperscale module gives you the much-needed breathing space, which the industry was looking at for quite a long time.

The SMBs are not scalable. New devices come out from time to time that are more performant. The mainstream devices are also not scalable except if you go with the Maestro version, and then you can just plug in an extra firewall and it scales up. With the chassis you just plug in an extra blade and it scales up also. So the Maestro and the chassis are very scalable, but for the other models it comes down to buying new boxes if the current ones aren't sufficient anymore.

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. My customers are mostly medium-sized businesses, but my clientele also includes enterprises.

The product is scalable. Everyone in our company uses the product. We are 100 users. We have an on-premise firewall. We use it every day.

I have been impressed by the performance of this software since we deployed it.

Its scalability is very good. Our entire force is about 190 people, and most of them use it at some point just because they are going out to the internet and have that protection for the workstations. 

It is being used extensively. Everyone is using it, and we do have plans to increase the functionality on the device.

We haven't needed to expand our throughput capacity.
However, based on the Check Point documentation, it is hyperscale ready  capable of up to 475 Gbps of Threat Prevention.

The solution is scalable and it is easy to do.

Users get a really nice performance in the order of 2.5 GPS.

It seems pretty scalable. Scalability is one of the features that make Check Point different from other vendors. Most of the Quantum series are usable with the Maestro solution, where the client can practically add up other appliances on top of the previous one, without replacing it.

We've encountered challenges related to scalability, particularly with its performance slowing down as the volume of objects in the network grows.

The scalability offers high performance.

In the beginning, I would consider Check Point solution as not scalable enough. However, after Maestro architecture, it is extremely scalable now. The organizations does not have to pay a lot of money to plan for the next 2-3 years. They are flexible enough to allow for the extension of their systems by adding another module like a blade.

They have a solution called Maestro where you can add devices in 10 minutes to scale the solution without doing a lot of configuration.

In our environment, we have a classic deployment so it's not as easy to scale; you need to do some configuration and have a maintenance window in which to do it. 

Scalability is really good. Check Point has the Maestro solution, where you can really scale easily without wasting resources.

When it comes to scalability, our current Check Point is far better than our previous firewall.

It scales well. Recently, during COVID-19, we did the scalability process, and it was easy.

Currently, this is used only for our inbound networks to provide security to our internal network. Around 6,000 people are taking advantage of this technology directly and indirectly in our organization.

We have certainly increased number of firewalls in our organization. In the future, if is required, then we will definitely use more.

The scalability presented by the tool is very good and flexible.

The scalability is good.

When you perform sizing, make sure that the necessary scalability is considered. There's no going back when things like this are compromised.

The scalability is great.

Scalability is very easy. I haven't found anything that is the issue with the scalability of this firewall. If you have complete knowledge of it, the scalability is not tough.

Check Point firewalls are extremely scalable. Recently, I deployed Check Point in an AWS cloud solution for one of my clients, and it's been absolutely excellent in handling growth. They've grown from 10,000 users to a million users. The way Check Point has advertised the product, it is supposed to be highly scalable, which means it grows as your demand grows, and that has been the case. 

Recently we have set up a test case where we are moving over management servers from on-premise to a Check Point-provided Infinity cloud solution. We are still at the testing phase but, overall, it's been a great experience so far.

It provides good scalability. In total, we are responsible for around three hundred and fifty endpoints.

One of the things that I appreciate most about Check Point NGFW is its flexibility. It can be deployed in a variety of ways, including physical appliances, virtual machines, and cloud-based instances. This makes it easy to scale your security infrastructure up or down as needed.

Our team didn't account for a vast increase in workload as new features were added to our firewall (HTTPS inspection, threat emulation, etc.) and therefore we bought the lowest tier for what we thought we would need. We've found that this is a little too strenuous on our gateway and are working on purchasing more powerful firewalls based on the recommendation of our local Check Point engineer.  

The solution is less scalable when using hardware-based solutions. Especially the smaller models have limited possibilities to expand on port / performance level. Both issues can be resolved using the Maestro solution, but that is limited to specific models.

This firewall is very much scalable. The introduction of Maestro has changed the concept of hyperscaling.  

In terms of the scalability, it is very easy to extend the utilization of Check Point firewalls. We did so in the past. We extended our environment in our organization and it was very easy to extend it.

We have around 4,000 to 5,000 people who are using the Check Point firewalls directly or indirectly. They are passing their traffic through it. Expansion of our usage completely depends on the organization. If they want to do so they will tell us and, if that happens, we will definitely go for Check Point firewalls.

I rate the tool's scalability a ten out of ten. 

The solution is easily scalable.

Since we chose a model larger than our needs, we aren't looking for a scalable solution.

This system has been very scalable. Check Point offers multiple security 'blades' that let you start out small, and increase as needed without having to drop a bunch of money on new hardware.

There are good scalability options through virtualisation. The platform can be expanded to multiple segments.

This solution provides service for 50,000 employees in my organization.

The scalability is really good.

Scalability is not a problem. It has both UI and CLI-based options to configure it, and it is not difficult to extend or scale. We have between four and six deployments and we plan to continue using it in the future. As we are growing, we will continue to expand its usage.

We have about 12 people working directly with Check Point NGFW. There are approximately 4,000 users who are indirectly using it, as their traffic passes through the firewall. It is used by the entire organization.

The scalability is very good for Check Point Firewall. It is very easy to increase. For example, during the COVID-19 period, we increased our deployment on an emergency basis, and it was very easy.

My organization has around 4,000 people. 

For Check Point, we have a team of around eight people who manage it. We are basically a team of senior network engineers.

If you're looking for scalability and you need to add more power and performance and to scale up, they have a new solution, but I haven't used it yet.

In terms of the extent of our use, it's our main firewall. Everything flows through it.

We currently have four direct users and all of them are security engineers. I'm doing most of the deployment and the others are responsible for the day-to-day operations. In the overall company there are more than 10,000 users, and the traffic throughput is around 10 Gb.

The solution offers high-performance devices ranging from small to big data centers.

Virtual Security offers up to 13 connected gateways helping with managed security.

I have been using Check Point firewalls for a few years now and I enjoy the interface.

It also integrates great with our other security tools.

The GUI is much more user-friendly than other Firewall vendors.

The solution is very scalable. There are a lot of different types of devices to choose from.

The solution is very scalable; Check Point has a variety of NGSW devices that can scale with the user base.

We are a company with 1,200 employees, and approximately 700 are using this solution.

We've already purchased a new management server from Check Point, and it will be replacing our 205 appliance. They make it easy. These devices inter-operate together, so if we need more resources, for example, on the management end, we're able to buy that server and replace our old one and scale up as needed.

As far as users are concerned, we have 70 locations throughout the State of South Carolina with a total of 400 to 500 devices that can be connected at any point in time.

I would think we have plans to increase our usage. We work in tele-psychiatry, for the State of South Carolina, and telemedicine right now is a hot topic. I see it very likely that our usage could double and triple in the coming years.

The biggest enterprises in the world use Check Point products. Scalability is not an issue.

The performance is excellent in the new appliances. The solution is very scalable and easy to integrate.

At present, we have 30 for our distribution. So, it is pretty scalable.

With the latest upgrades of R80, Check Point has bettered its performance, and hence, scalability has improved a lot. Also, there are multiple NG features that can be utilized that makes it more suitable for multiple solutions.

They scale well.

All information passes through the firewall. We have about 8,000-plus users, including communicating with third-party or the networks of other enterprises that we do business with.

The solution is very scalable. Configurations can be imported to other units.  Many levels of hardware and software are available.

It should scale well as they now support more than 40 CPUs on a single system. 

There are currently more than 5,000 users within government facilities in Mexico. This team has provided us with the necessary resources to provide services to users in record time.

With the teams that we currently have, we have not considered increasing the number of technicians. If the need should arise then Check Point is still a very good option.

It is scalable.

The entire company network resides behind these particular firewalls. All of the users, if they wanted to go out onto the Internet, have to go through this firewall.

There are around five to eight people who worked for my team. We monitored the firewall. In case of issues, we would then go a call with the customer and troubleshoot that issue.

If you choose Check Point maestro platform they you need not to worry about the scalability.

Our company has about 1,000 users that generate traffic that passes through the firewall. Beyond that, we haven't had much need to scale.

In my opinion, scaling is very important and it must be done ahead of time. I would suggest considering scale three years in advance, as opposed to just the present.

I would rate its scalability abilities eight out of ten.

The scalability is good.

Check Point NGFW is scalable. The hyper-scale platform can scale up or scale-out. You can buy different powers and stack them.

Check Point can scale but at times we have experienced some issues.

The scalability of this solution is good.

The scalability is quite good. You can scale well across locations for not too much cost. If a company needs to expand, it can do so relatively easily.

Also, cost-wise, it's very affordable to scale up. It's not expensive to add hardware and licenses as needed. They make upgrading very cheap.

We have 200 people on the solution. That said, they are using it with an IPsec tunnel. They don't use all of the capabilities of the hardware. They are using it just to encrypt tunneling between the sites.

The solution offers good scalability. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's not hard.

We have 50 users on the solution right now.

I haven't had to test scalability yet because we purchased it for our existing needs and as a company, our performance and our needs are pretty flat. We don't really have need to scale yet.

We are adequately equipped for what we need and we have room to grow and to add all of our users and possibly add additional products down the road and still have plenty of room to do so on how these gateways are powered.

We have a total of about 620 employees that use Check Point NGFW. I would say we are 80% there. There are still some users that have to be migrated to it once we test their accounts, their kiosks, that kind of stuff. 

There is one primary employee who is dedicated to maintenance and there are another two who back him up but our network administrator is primarily responsible.

They do scale well as long as a company is not scaling rapidly. This is the reason we have a CPSizeMe tool. With normal growth, they will easily go for five to 10 years. Normal growth means setting up a few offices, not doing big mergers.

We have about four to five Check Point users out of 20 network engineers.

In my new job, we have 80 clients in user center.

The solution is scalable - we use the Active-Standby Clusters, but could switch to Active-Active and add additional Gateway nodes if needed.

We are definitely planning to increase the scale, especially the endpoint. The cost in comparison with the brand new addition will be okay.

It is scalable and very easy to expand the throughput and resources.

Check Point firewall provide a very cool feature using Quantum Maestro Hyperscale Orchestrator, it provides on-demand cloud-like scaling of our on-premises security gateways. By using Maestro, we can aggregate multiple mid-level Check Point appliances to provide a high throughput volume. It is very useful to scale up to 52 appliances. If we use other firewall solutions, they can only aggregate up to TWO firewalls with same model in clustering or purchase a more high end model firewall. 

For a long term planning, we can expand the throughput by reusing the existing Check Point hardware investment and adding new appliances to.

Overall, the product handles a production workload like a champ.

So far, no issues with scalability have been detected - other than hardware replacement on the growth of traffic

The scalability is possible, however, it's based on requirements. When we get a new solution, we plan out for the next four or five years. It can scale so long as you design it properly at the outset. 

We've not tried to expand Check Point. We have two sites. We have a primary site and a secondary site that is off-prem. For this reason, we planned big. We planned for a high amount of availability for our two sites. We use clusters of four gateways: two gateways are in one cluster, and another two gateways are in another cluster. If one goes down, it switches to the other. If the second goes down, it switches to the other DR site. We've got backups of everything. 

Check Point NGFW is fairly scalable.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

If I take into consideration my company's customers who use the solution, then I would have to say that there are around 300 to 400 users.

This is a scalable solution. We have about twenty customers that are using the solution currently.

I couldn't tell you about the scalability. I don't know. I know that we can use a federation, but I think it is scalable because we can buy additional licenses. As I mentioned, right now we have five working together, but we can buy until 50 or a 100, so I guess that it is scalable because you can keep increasing.

The scalability is great.

It is highly scalable.

The solution is highly scalable and responsive.

I like the fact that it's so simple to scale.

The solution can be scaled from very small branch offices to huge data centers or even cloud data centers.

There are no issues with extendability or scalability. Over the course of a year, we added another firewall, bringing us from one to two deployments, and the process was not tough. We were easily able to manage it.

We have approximately 12 people who work with this firewall during different shifts.

They're quite scalable because they support large data centers, while offering reliability and performances as well.

For our requirements, it's scalable enough. We have a 1 gig uplink to the Internet, which is easily doable with open servers. 

We used to have some problems with the performance, then we upgraded the license and the scalability has worked well since.

There are 1,200 to 1,500 users.

From a scalability perspective, they have a solutions like Check Point Maestro. Therefore, it is easy to upscale nowadays.

We have over 200,000 end users.

The scale is currently very good. In our organization around 3000 or more employees use it. There is two IT personnel that will configure 30 Check Points, 13,500 gateways will be there and it will handle around 3000 plus employees. 

We will increase usage. Currently, one new branch will be open. They are also migrating from Fortinet to Check Point's firewall. The previous they did 40 deployments here, however, currently they're migrating to the Check Point next-generation firewall.

The scalability of Check Point is great. With the usage of Multi-Domain Servers, you can integrate all the devices into one console. You also always have the chance to expand creating new domains. Also, this distribution helps to have a very structured and organized management. It is always a very good thing when things don't go as expected and you need to solve any problem. Finding where the issue is in your organization is key.

The solution is scalable. 

Although I only have one unit, I know that it scales perfectly.

Scalability is excellent.

It is very easy to scale and extend usage. We started with five firewalls and now there are approximately ten. There is not much effort required to scale and it is not very complex.

Directly or indirectly, there are between 2,000 and 3,000 people using it. Whenever their traffic is required to be sent to the internet from the office environment, the traffic passes through the firewall.

It's a scalable solution. It's very good.

The solution offers good scalability.

It is scalable. We can use the Maestro solution from Check Point for scalability. We can add new appliances as the company grows. If we need more performance and throughput, we can add additional appliances and have more performance. Check Point Maestro is the best solution for scalability.

This NGFW is very much scalable; however, I am not sure about other components such as PTC, etc.

We have around 600 to 700 endpoints, workstations, points of sale, and mobile devices. We also have about 200 servers, a WiFi environment, and a networking environment that is not small. We have implemented it 100 percent but, because of the Coronavirus, the company itself is not 100 percent capacity.

For now, we have implemented everything that we wanted and the firewalls are working 100 percent. There are no plans in the near future to grow. Of course, if everything goes back to normal, maybe we will grow.

There are no problems for us in terms of scalability because we're not working at full capacity. We designed the new solution to give us the resources that meet our needs for the moment and for the future. There is no problem with scalability and we can add new firewalls, or replace what we have with bigger firewalls. Everything is okay in terms of scalability from our side.

Scalability is good. Since four years ago, we have been increasing the number of users and the traffic. The solution is working well and working with our progress.

Currently, Check Point NGFW is the most scalable firewall on the market.

We have more than 500 users in our organization.

We will continue to use this solution and we plan to increase the sandboxing feature, which is the best feature of Check Point.

The scalability is awesome.

We have hundreds of users that use the solution currently within our company.

Scalability is a good feature that this solution has. It is easy scale out and do site-to-site implementations. Sometimes, you have to clean the OS or RAM to free up availability. However, if you do this, then there are generally no issues with scaling it.

We have some firewalls with the VSX functionality which allows us to add more virtual firewalls to the same physical cluster. That allows for scalability. But when compared to Fortinet, the way to have more than one virtual firewall on the same cluster is much harder.

It's very scalable if we have the VSX license for Check Point, which we have in some places. But it's much more complex than adding to the FortiGate. So it's scalable, but it's not easy to work with VSX, especially compared to the competitor.

Our usage should be increasing weekly because our company is buying other companies constantly and we need to deploy firewalls on the companies we buy. It shouldn't increase a lot, though, just a bit.

We have about 1,000 users crossing the firewalls and 10 network admins.

The scalability is very good.

Check Point NGFW could be more scalable. I think Palo Alto has more plugins and features, and Check Point needs more features. However, Check Point integration is very complex.

The solution is very scalable. It is easy to expand it, if required. and doesn't take too much time. It also doesn't require too much manpower.

There are 2000 to 4000 people who are indirectly using Check Point Firewall.

The Check Point 44000 and 64000 Next Generation Firewalls are designed to be quite scalable. 

The scalability is quite nice at the firewall level. It gives us the possibility of implementing clusters and high-availability.

We are also working on an Azure implementation and it looks good. We have not yet deployed to the Azure Check Point implementation, but it promises a lot.

We have about 200 employees and, on the administrative side, there are 12 to 15 people working with the Check Point solution. They are mostly networking infra engineers. We are using about 40 percent of the firewall capacity. We don't currently have plans to increase capacity.

The solution is scalable in terms of enabling the features and deploying management servers.

The scalability is good.

There are more than 10,000 users. The Check Point Firewall is deployed through the company.

Check Point is definitely scalable.

The product is very scalable. You have very good options. For example, if you start with a smaller firewall and you want to upgrade to have newer hardware, they have different options. For example, you can run a script that is going to tell you the new appliances that you need, according to your new requirements according to your network consumption. 

It did launch Maestro about two years ago. Maestro is something that allows you to stack firewalls. If your current firewalls handle the traffic anymore, you can add new firewalls to it. 

If you want to change the firewall you can do these trade-ins. You can return the old firewall and they will give you a special discount. 

One of our customers has more than 200 branch offices, which are protected by Check Point SMB appliances. All of these appliances are managed by Check Point SmartProvisioning. This customer has one Check Point cluster that secures server segments and another Check Point cluster to secure the client segment.

The latest product, Maestro is very good and scales well.

In terms of scalability, they have products that can fit into the environment. It's a very scalable solution. For our requirements, it fits very well. You can go with whatever kind of setup you want: Active-Passive, Active-Active. Check Point is very easy. Their solution is ready for our market; it's very well suited. Wherever we want to go, Check Point can provide a solution.

Currently, we are using somewhere around 50 to 60 percent of the box's capacity.

Scalability means upgrading to newer, better hardware.

From an end-user perspective, everyone in our organization is using it, as it's a perimeter device. If they have to access the internet, they use this firewall to allow that access. We have about 4,000 end-users and about 200,000 concurrent connections.

It is very good and scalable. We have recently expanded the usage of Check Point and it was not a very tough process to scale this firewall.

Right now it's protecting around 3,000-plus employees.

As far as scalability goes, I don't feel we really had to push it. We're not a huge company. It was literally always resolved with a license upgrade. If there were too many users connected, we would just upgrade a license and then have more users connected concurrently. So scalability, not an issue. But we sized it pretty appropriately when we installed.

Per my experience, it is very easy to scale these firewalls, because they are combined with the central management point. It is very easy to push the same configuration to different firewalls at the same time. It does not take much time to extend usage.

We use them throughout our organization. Currently we have used them for around 50 percent of our needs and there is definitely a room to grow. In the future we will definitely try to increase usage, if it is required.

The solution is not scalable per se. There is only one way to upgrade and that is to buy new appliances.

Currently, we have around 7,000 people using this solution.

Likely, we won't be increasing usage. We are building new releases and we are considering changing this solution to another vendor. We might switch from Check Point to maybe Palo Alto or Cisco. We don't know which yet.

The solution's scalability is good.

With our increasing business, we have given a proposal to increase the number of firewalls.

In my organization, there were five associate consultants included in the deployment process, including me.

We have roughly 7000 appliances. The tool is scalable. I like the scalability of the solution. We have 10 to 20 customers.

We have 200 people on the solution currently. 

In terms of scalability, what we have seen is that it has a big deployment right now. So it all depends on what kind of environment the customer has. If he's already a Check Point user, it is easy for them, but if it is migrating from one platform to another, it is a little complex. One more thing is that the skillset availability required for Check Point is, in terms of implementation, a little less compared to others. The resources and the technical stuff are there for implementation. You find fewer people on Check Point compared to Sophos or Fortinet or any other platform.

There are different models available. Sizing can be done accordingly. They have a good range of versions available for small to large data centers. So, scalability is definitely there. 

Scalability is not an issue with Check Point.

The scalability is good. I haven't had any scalability issues. If the firewall gets stressed, we buy a new firewall.

There are many options, such as, virtualization. They have also release a new product, Quantum, that makes it possible to scale up and have more firewalls. 

As an integrator, we have very big companies (like banks) to small companies, who have only 200 users or less. 

The firewalls are scalable with our workload. We are at about 20 to 30 percent utilization so even if we doubled of our existing network resources and load on the firewalls, they would still have the space to scale. They're enough for the networks that we have implemented.

We recently finished a deployment and it's still in the user acceptance test phase. As of now, I cannot say anything in terms of increased usage. But for the customers that we have deployed it for within India and the APAC region, so far the results have been pretty good.

We have the right appliance for our specifications. If we wanted to get a bigger box then we will just get a bigger box based on our requirements.

The solution is scalable. I'd rate it at a nine out of ten.

The new version is highly scalable. Now all of our users depend on the firewall. We have about 150 users. We require two staff for deployment and management.

When it works, scalability is perfect. 

The solution is scalable.

My impression is that the solution is scalable.

I've not had to deal with scaling them but from what I understand, they scale to huge organizations.

We have around five IT engineers who use this solution in my company and five who work on deployment and maintenance.

It's used throughout the business, with around 1,500 users, so for all the traffic. We do not have plans to increase usage. 

Scalability and throughput are very high. They have also launched a solution called Check Point Maestro, which provides cloud-level scalability on-premises. This makes it very scalable.

They are quite scalable. They are designed to extend in large data centers and tech environments. They are designed to support the needs of large networks, and offer reliability and performance.

Nice, easy to connect and implement high availability.

It is a scalable platform.

The scalability is very good.

The scalability is high.

The solution boasts good scalability. 

Check Point is scalable.

The scalability of the firewall depends on the model. In terms of the implementation, it's really easy.

We have about 25 users for the entire solution. We have two engineers who work on deployments and implementation. We have another 18 engineers who do support and operations. They have responsibility to monitor the firewall 24/7.

It protects the core network and ISP: the routing, switching, and APM backbone. This is around 8,000 pieces of equipment. 

We don't have plans to increase our usage right now.

The scalability of the solution is not great for us because we have old equipment. With newer equipment, I think the scalability would be much better. It is no fault of the solution itself. 

The scalability of the product is very good. If a company needs to expand it, it can. It's not hard. 

It scales okay because they are SCADA compliant and follow the industry standards. It is best suited to enterprise-level organizations.

Check Point NGFW has been scalable.

The solution is easy to scale.