Compare A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs. Radware Alteon
A10 Networks Thunder ADC is ranked 5th in Application Delivery Controllers with 8 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 12th in Application Delivery Controllers with 4 reviews. A10 Networks Thunder ADC is rated 8.8, while Radware Alteon is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of A10 Networks Thunder ADC writes "A reliable product that is very easy to configure and administrate while being cost-effective". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "Enables consistent security, single sign-on, but automation features need work". A10 Networks Thunder ADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, Citrix NetScaler ADC and Radware Alteon, whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, Citrix NetScaler ADC and A10 Networks Thunder ADC. See our A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs. Radware Alteon report.
Most Helpful Review | |||||
|
| ||||
 Find out what your peers are saying about A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs. Radware Alteon and other solutions. Updated: January 2020. 398,050 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |||||
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | |
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. | The most valuable aspect is that it establishes user security. I am finding SSL-TLS acceleration the most valuable function, with certificate management. It is easy to generate certificates and assign them to services |
Cons | |
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. | I would like for the load balancing to work with premier and the cloud, a mix of premium and cloud. |
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. | Information Not Available |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers solutions are best for your needs. 398,050 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Ranking  | |
Views 5,303 Comparisons 4,126 Reviews 9 Average Words per Review 1,146 Avg. Rating 8.8 | Views 3,697 Comparisons 3,012 Reviews 4 Average Words per Review 189 Avg. Rating 7.8 |
Top Comparisons | |
 Compared 53% of the time.  Compared 12% of the time.  Compared 6% of the time. | Compared 55% of the time. Compared 12% of the time.  Compared 8% of the time. |
Also Known As | |
| Thunder ADC, AX Series | Alteon |
Learn | |
| A10 Networks Video Not Available | Radware |
Overview | |
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. | Radware Alteon application delivery controller (ADC) and the load balancer that with application SLA. It provides advanced, end-to-end local and global load balancing capabilities for all Web, cloud and mobile-based applications. Alteon load balancer combines best-of-breed application delivery capabilities, market-leading SSL performance that supports all of the latest encryption protocols, and advanced services to companies with ongoing application lifecycle management challenges that impact the performance of web applications (such as heavier, more complex web content); mobility, and the migration to the cloud. |
Offer | |
Learn more about A10 Networks Thunder ADC | Learn more about Radware Alteon |
Sample Customers | |
| 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 | Convergys |
Top Industries | |
University33% Retailer11% Recreational Facilities And Services Company11% Insurance Company11% Software R&D Company44% Comms Service Provider13% Media Company6% Government6% | No Data Available |
Find out what your peers are saying about A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs. Radware Alteon and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
398,050 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See also A10 Networks Thunder ADC Reviews, Radware Alteon Reviews, and our list of Best Application Delivery Controllers Companies.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers 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.