We performed a comparison between A10 Thunder TPS and F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The response time to an attack is instant. We've used some outsourced solutions in the past, out in the cloud, that weren't so quick. But it's all within our control now. We control how fast it mitigates."
"The solution's support is one of the coolest things about the product. I"
"The primary benefit that we see from their systems is that their filtering technology has the ability to detect and drop the malicious traffic from the legitimate traffic with a high success rate. That, in combination with the very small effort needed to manage their systems, are the two most important benefits to us."
"It is a scalable solution."
"They give us the ability to configure many features for DDoS. There are many items that we can use."
"We selected the solution because of its programmable automated defense using RESTful API. We didn't want to connect to the box. We wanted to be able to do some automation. We wanted to have our own portal because we wanted to connect our customers to our own UI using the A10 API. It has been good and exactly what we need."
"We can keep track of all the customer's requirements. We can forecast our trails and we can forecast our overall financial things."
"The solution has reduced the amount of manual intervention required during an attack. We have the inline solution and when it comes to the customers that we have on it, it has saved us some troubleshooting time."
"The decryption is great."
"The most valuable feature of F5 BIG-IP AFM is all of my workers enjoy using it."
"The most valuable feature of F5 BIG-IP AFM is the iRules where I can customize the configuration."
"It excels in preventing downtime and maintaining application performance, which is crucial for our clients' security and operational continuity."
"The solution is easily deployable and has great functionality."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that the blocking of IP's."
"CGNAT is one of its strong areas."
"It is stable."
"If there's one aspect of A10 that needs improvement it would be the training. All of their training is done online, at least in what we've been exposed to. I would like to have a classroom environment for training... It would give [people] a chance to provision it."
"The last issue we had to contact them about was just a question of a false-positive. The A10 system wasn't supposed to decide what is a false-positive. So if we send it good traffic, it's supposed to just pass that good traffic through. But we opened this last ticket because the A10 did block some of the good traffic. Their support had to tweak it a little bit, but it wasn't anything that took a long time."
"They have a cloud scrubbing feature that redirects the traffic if the on-prem appliance can't accommodate a large amount of traffic but it's not available where we are."
"We have had some issues with implementation. So, it is the only area that needs improvement."
"The upgrade process for the boxes is not efficient. We have to go through the A10 aGalaxy where we have issues, like timeouts. They told me it was fixed in the latest version, but I tried to do it on the Portal and it is not working all the time."
"I rate Thunder TPS seven out of 10 for scalability."
"I would like for them to develop an advanced reporting feature."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"There is room for improvement in Advanced Firewall Manager's dashboard statistics, especially during attacks."
"For configuring the firewall, every single vendor on the planet has pretty much the same logic when it comes to firewalls, and F5 has a completely different approach and completely different behavior."
"F5 BIG-IP AFM can improve the reporting interface in relation to advanced troubleshooting depending on CLI. They should have enhanced troubleshooting with the use of GUI."
"The initial setup of F5 BIG-IP AFM in a complex environment was simple. However, the full deployment took us approximately one year."
"This would be absolutely the best network security solution if the price were not so high."
"The web gateway feature could improve in F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM)."
"Firstly, geolocation currently relies on manual updates. It has to move to automatic updates. There are no automatic updates for this feature. If some IPs, countries, or service providers move to another country, now you will be allow IPs that you previously denied. This is because you depend on the database, which doesn't update automatically. This is really a very important area that they need to improve."
"The solution's UI could be improved."
More F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
A10 Thunder TPS is ranked 15th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 12 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) is ranked 7th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 21 reviews. A10 Thunder TPS is rated 8.8, while F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of A10 Thunder TPS writes "A highly stable solution that can be used for load balancing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) writes "Straightforward setup with very good granularity and performance". A10 Thunder TPS is most compared with Arbor DDoS, Cloudflare, Radware DefensePro, Corero and Imperva DDoS, whereas F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) is most compared with Arbor DDoS, AWS Shield and Radware DefensePro. See our A10 Thunder TPS vs. F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.
