Most Helpful Review
With iRule or aFleX scripting, you can influence the complete packet instead of just a few bytes or bits
Find out what your peers are saying about A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs. F5 BIG-IP and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
397,408 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Compared to F5, which I used about six years ago, the A10 is much easier when routing. You don't have to use the wildcard bits to route it between the different segments. It's much less troublesome to configure.
The ease of use is very good. It's very robust. It just sits and works.
A10 explained why the latency dropped significantly on a site that we have.
We have two appliances and I'm able to move my application from one appliance to another. I don't have to move my whole A10 to be active on the other side or to be passive on the other side. If an application is having a problem, I can just move it using a command.
We do have the option of creating virtual chassis, so that gives it a bit more security. If we find an application which is not going to play well in the main pool, we can easily create a virtual chassis and have that application in that virtual chassis. With the virtual chassis we can also create system partitions and have a test system for test applications, and have the others elsewhere.
The Global Server Load Balancing (GSLB) is simple to use.
Being a public entity and having a public website which is highly visible with a lot of traffic, we are a target for DDoS. Within the last year, we have had a couple of DDoS attacks which could have affected our web traffic and taken down certain parts of our website. This did not happen because the A10 was able to mitigate the attacks using rate limiting that can be configured for DDoS mitigation on the box.
It is very useful to have a simple dashboard where you can login and look into what your traffic patterns are, then look and see what times of day you're experiencing the heaviest traffic. You can quickly identify if you are possibly having a security issue or security breach. It makes it very easy to use the box.
F5 BIG-IP is used with good applications and functions as an application firewall with additional features. We will not use any feature or any service unless there is a business case and there is a need for implementation.
We're able to do load balancing and global load balancing. When you marry those two products together, you can do a lot more. We're able to deliver our applications more securely and faster. It has improved our deliverability where we have more service across the shared data centers. We can intelligently reach all of those client connections across all of the servers and do it fairly quickly. It has helped improve our application delivery and performance.
It is a fast and available solution.
It is the perfect solution when you have high workloads in your IT environment.
It integrates with AWS WAF, which makes it easy to deploy without changes to your infrastructure.
It improves the overall performance of applications by decreasing the burden on servers associated with managing and maintaining applications and network sessions, as well as by performing application-specific tasks.
Initial setup is easy and pretty standard.
It is a very good, flexible solution. It helps us to catch up on flaws in our partner solutions on top of its load balancing feature.
There is room for improvement in the GUI. I just migrated from the 2.7 software train to the 4.1, and there are still people on 2.7. The latter is a very old GUI if you compare it to F5. It's not as easy to use and a lot of things are missing. They've made a lot of improvements in the 4.1 step, but compared to the ease of use of F5, it's still quite difficult. For people who haven't got a lot of experience, the GUI can be quite challenging.
The user interface is what people complain about most of the time, particularly if they don't use it very often. Then they complain that it's a bit clunky.
I would like them to provide learning tips and a community forum where users can share ideas. They need more detailed support articles on the A10 website.
The solution does logging, but the logging capacity is really small. Because we have a bunch of traffic here, we usually get a logging-side warning that "This many logs were lost because of the heavy traffic." If the logging was better, that would be very good.
Traffic flow issues are very difficult, as there's no means for us to analyze the traffic coming in or out of the appliance without technical support.
When it comes to support, there is always room for improvement. First call resolution is not always there for urgent issues. The first call resolution is something that could be improved upon.
They need to make the user interface (GUI) a bit more usable and intuitive. Some features can be a little difficult to find at times. Sometimes, the workflow in the GUI doesn't match the workflow of an actual workflow. E.g., if I want to create a load balancer application, sometimes you've got to do things a bit out of order in the GUI in order to make it work right.
The setup depends on certain situations. In certain scenarios, it may be more complex than others. For example, while the initial configuration may be easy, the environment itself may be complex and that may limit the ease of deployment. It is easy for those who understand their environment.
The license terms for "non-commercial" will be a challenge for us.
The license terms for "non-commercial" will are challenging for us.
There are issues with F5 BIG-IP but they are minor issues not affecting production and services. Sometimes the operations and the facility systems fail. However, there is an alert action from the windows. An ordeal for the manager.
I would like to see improvement in the manageability and easier setup.
I would like them to have more flexible models.
Performance: Using the product, applications are jittery.
Needs to provide a visual interface to follow a customer's activity (from client to BIG-IP to SNAT IP to the chosen server, then back). Today, we are still performing packet captures.
We would like to see load balancing between the cloud and the on-premise, a straightforward deployment feature.
Pricing and Cost Advice
As for the initial investment in the hardware, F5 and A10 are quite similar now. For the current A10 solution, the initial cost was about $36,000. As for annual support, the F5 solution would be between $10,000 and $12,000, while the A10 is $2,200 a year for support.
There were budgetary constraints that keep us from investing in the single pane of glass traffic management feature. We saw a demo of this feature about a year to a year and a half ago.
It is $7000 per unit for the support annually.
We previously had F5 and switched because of costs.
One of the main reasons for switching away from Cisco was the licensing model. A10 gives you global server load balancing for free, while Cisco charged a significant licensing fee for that.
For the hardware and license, we paid $35,000 per box, which was a one-time cost. Then, for the Gold Support on the two boxes, we pay $9400 annually.
The pricing is a third of the price of the F5 competition.
They are expensive.
We purchased through the AWS Marketplace because it was a popular way to go, and we were intrigued. The price of this product is not an issue. They have good pricing and licensing.
Unless the price difference is large, this is not the primary concern for the product. The performance and product-related issues (secure for VPN, multi-function for network device, etc.) are the keys.
I would recommend that the cost be lowered.
If you are planning to use security features, better to go for strong hardware and the best bundle license, which is great for web security.
The price is high.
We have found the pricing and licensing on AWS to be competitive.
Purchasing through the AWS Marketplace was good. We chose to go through the AWS Marketplace because everything that we needed was a soft appliance. We needed something to work in Amazon, and this product was available there.
out of 28 in Application Delivery Controllers
Average Words per Review
out of 28 in Application Delivery Controllers
Average Words per Review
Compared 53% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
|Thunder ADC, AX Series||BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP|
A10 Networks' application networking, load balancing and DDoS protection solutions accelerate and secure data center applications and networks of thousands of the world's largest enterprises, service providers, and hyper scale web providers.
|The BIG-IP family of products offers the application intelligence that network managers need to ensure applications are fast, secure, and available. All BIG-IP products share a common underlying architecture, F5's Traffic Management Operating System (TMOS), which provides unified intelligence, flexibility, and programmability. Together, BIG-IP's powerful platforms, advanced modules, and centralized management system make up the most comprehensive set of application delivery tools in the industry.|
Learn more about A10 Networks Thunder ADC
Learn more about F5 BIG-IP
|123inkt.nl, Bentley University, Box, Brainshark, Buienradar, Capgemini, CGN/LSN & NAT64, Chengdu Telecom, Club One, Code Ready, CRC Health Group, Cyso, Deutsche Telekom, Earth Class Mail, Excite, FFF Enterprises, Florence County, Framingham State University, From30||Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.|
Recreational Facilities And Services Company11%
Software R&D Company45%
Comms Service Provider14%
Comms Service Provider25%
Financial Services Firm21%
Software R&D Company28%
Comms Service Provider18%
Financial Services Firm9%