Compare Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. pfSense

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. pfSense and other solutions. Updated: July 2021.
522,693 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
"I like the way Firepower presents the data. It gives you two classifications for the evidence, something based on the priority of the evidence and another classification based on the impact of the evidence in your environment. This makes it very easy to spot the evidence that is most impactful to my environment. Instead of having to go through all the evidence based on that priority, I can focus on the evidence that has the most impact on my environment.""The most valuable feature of the Firepower solution is FireSIGHT, which can be easily managed and is user-friendly.""Once you add Firepower onto to it and you start enabling some of its features, you get some IDS/IPS involved with it and you can even do web filtering.""The most valuable features of Cisco firewalls are the IPS and IDS items. We find them very helpful. Those are the biggest things because we have some odd, custom-made products in our environment. What we've found through their IPS and IDS is that their vulnerability engines have caught things that are near-Zero-day items, inside of our network.""The IPS, as well as the malware features, are the two things that we use the most and they're very valuable.""The protection and security features, like URL filtering, the inspection, and the IPS feature, are also very valuable for us. We don't have IT staff at most of the sites so for us it's important to have a robust firewall at those sites""We can easily track unauthorized users and see where traffic is going.""With the FMC and the FirePOWERs, the ability to quickly replace a piece of hardware without having to have a network outage is useful. Also, the ability to replace a piece of equipment and deploy the config that the previous piece of equipment had is pretty useful."

More Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall Pros »

"It's a high-performance device. The network performance is also really good. We check how much time it takes for the servers. Our network performance has increased since using this solution.""The most valuable feature of this solution is that you can start off with a simple firewall and expand it to UTM.""The program is very stable.""We find Check Point valuable because they are 100% focused on security. It totally closes the potential vulnerability channel. We can check our mail and our attachments and we can scan everything easily. We get an immediate report about the situation of the attachments. We can discover if the target's security attack was started from phishing, etc. We also enjoy using the additional features that protect our internal customer from targeted attacks.""The IPS, application and URL filtering, as well as Identity Awareness, are all very valuable features.""A unique architecture makes this product stand out from other solutions.""As per the solution's blade design, there are many options. For example, you have to buy a UTM blade and an advanced malware blade, etc. If the blade license is there, we can configure from the firewall GUI.""The most valuable feature for us is the cluster support."

More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pros »

"The scalability is very good, where you can do an HA configuration and then bring in another box, if necessary.""The most valuable features are the VPN and the capture photo.""The solution is very robust.""Good basic firewall features.""The initial setup is easy.""The initial setup was simple and fast.""The documentation is very good.""At our peak time, we have reached more than 5,000 concurrent connections."

More pfSense Pros »

Cons
"Also, they have a Firepower source file that I can work on the ASA device and on Firepower devices. A problem here lies in the way that you manage these devices. Some devices do not support the FMC, and some devices have to be managed through ASDM, and others have to be managed through FMC.""I would like to see the inclusion of more advanced antivirus features in the next release of this solution.""In Firepower, there is an ability to search and dig into a search, which is nice. However, I'm not a super fan of the way it scrolls. If you want to look at something live, it's a lot different. You're almost waiting. With the ASDM, where it just flows, you can really see it. The second someone clicks something or does something, you'll see it. The refresh rate on the events in Firepower is not as smooth.""The worst part of the entire solution, and this is kind of trivial at times, is that management of the solution is difficult. You manage FireSIGHT through an internet browser. I've had Cisco tell me to manage it through Firefox because that's how they develop it. The problem is, depending on the page you're on, they don't function in the same way. The pages can be very buggy, or you can't resize columns in this one, or you can't do certain things in that one. It causes a headache in managing it.""For the new line of FTDs, the performance could be improved. We sometimes have issues with the 41 series, depending what we activate. If we activate too many intrusion policies, it affects the CPU.""The user interface for the Firepower management console is a little bit different from traditional Cisco management tools. If you look at products we already use, like Cisco Prime or other products that are cloud-based, they have a more modern user interface for managing the products. For Firepower, the user interface is not very user-friendly. It's a little bit confusing sometimes.""We would like to see improvement in recovery. If there is an issue that forces us to do recovery, we have to restart or reboot. In addition, sometimes we have downtime during the maintenance windows. If Cisco could enhance this, so that upgrades would not necessarily require downtime, that would be helpful.""We had an event recently where we had inbound traffic for SIP and we experienced an attack against our SIP endpoint, such that they were able to successfully make calls out... Both CTR, which is gathering data from multiple solutions that the vendor provides, as well as the FMC events connection, did not show any of those connections because there was not a NAT inbound which said either allow it or deny it."

More Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall Cons »

"The initial setup is difficult. It took me three tries to get it right. The setup took two or three hours.""The management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use.""It is a very expensive program and there are additional costs despite the standard licensing fees.""The stability of the solution could be improved, but this is the problem of all the solutions in the market. This isn't just a problem specific to Check Point.""Sometimes, if you aren't familiar with the solution, it can be a bit complex, but it does become easier to use with time. However, every time they launch a new version, it becomes more complex and you need to take time to get familiar with all the changes. For every version that they upgrade, you need to upskill yourself.""It can be difficult to install properly without prior training""If you compare the GUI with the Palo Alto and Forcepoint in the Cisco, they're very easy. Check Point, due to its design, is a little bit complex. They should make the GUI easy to use so that anyone can understand it easily, like Fortinet's GUI. Many companies end up using Fortinet because the GUI is very easy, and there's no need for training. They just deploy the box and do the configuration.""Our biggest complaint concerns the high resource usage for IDP/IPS, as we cannot turn on all of the features even with new hardware."

More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Cons »

"I would like to see different graphs available in the reporting.""If a user doesn't have a large amount of experience in Linux systems, they will have problems using this solution. Users need to be highly skilled in troubleshooting competency. Users who do not have such skills will find the product difficult to use.""The solution requires a lot of administration.""Layer 7 advanced firewall features are not included in the solution.""As an open-source solution, there are so many loopholes happening within the product. By design, no one is taking ownership of it, and that is worrisome to me.""ClamAV AntiVirus can cause some crashes. That service should be improved.""The technical support needs to be improved.""It needs to be more secure."

More pfSense Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"The price of this solution is not good or bad.""The Firepower series of appliances is not cheap. I just got a quote recently for six firewalls that was in the range of over half-a-million dollars. That's what could push us to look to other vendors...""Our subscription costs, just for the firewalls, is between $400,000 and $500,000 a year.""Cisco's pricing is high, at times, for what they provide.""The one-time cost is affordable, but the maintenance cost and the Smart Net costs need to be reduced. They're too high.""We normally license on a yearly basis. The hardware procurement cost should be considered. If you're virtual maybe that cost is eradicated and just the licensing cost is applied. If you have hardware the cost must be covered by you. All the shipping charges will be paid by you also. I don't thing there are any other hidden charges though.""Cisco pricing is premium. However, they gave us a 50 to 60 percent discount.""There are additional implementation and validation costs."

More Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice »

"On average, it is normally on the lower end, being less expensive than Palo Alto or Cisco.""It is more expensive than other solutions and would be more competetive in the market if it came down in price.""We pay approximately ‎€150,000 ($166,000 USD) per year.""Licensing is simply by the number of hosts that you are looking to protect within your environment. It makes it much easier to ensure that you are covering your environment.""There is flexibility in the different licensing models that are offered.""The pricing is pretty high, not just for your capital, for what you have to pay upfront, but for what you pay for your annual software renewals as well, compared to a lot of other vendors. Check Point is near the top, as far as how much it's going to cost you.""Pricing of CloudGuard is pretty fair when you have a single account. It's comparable with other cloud providers. But for our use case, it got really pricey when we had to deploy multiple CloudGuards on multiple accounts in different regions, because you can't have CloudGuard protecting multiple regions. That's the big thing.""The pricing and licensing have been good. We just had to do a license increase for our portion of it. We had that done within a couple of days. Given the fact that it's purely a software-based license, it ends up being even quicker than doing it for an on-prem firewall."

More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice »

"This solution provides enterprise-level features at a fraction of the cost of an enterprise firewall.""It is an open source firewall.""We are using the open-source version, not the commercial one.""It has almost zero cost, and it is open to us. It runs on a small appliance just for a couple of 100 bucks, and I've never had an appliance burn out on me yet.""It is open source.""I spent a couple of $1,000 on hardware, and the OS was free. A comparable firewall would cost me probably 20 grand. It saved a lot of money.""I like the fact that it is open-source.""pfSense is open-source, but the support is something that the customer pays for."

More pfSense Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
522,693 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Ease of Use - GUI familiarities  and adoption level can differ from user to user. - Personally I found CISCO  ASA… more »
Top Answer: Cisco Firepower Family and it is a NGFW since ASA is just a FW.
Top Answer: Check Point has pretty simple solutions, like the virtual appliance which you just download and it is imported into… more »
Top Answer: The cost is on the higher side, as it is based on workload, hence we need to decide which VPC or workload needs to be… more »
Top Answer: In terms of what could be improved, we have no support with the current Check Point environment. It ended maybe three or… more »
Top Answer: You don't really specify what type of router you are looking for but if you are talking about a gateway router I… more »
Top Answer: I mostly like all of it. Whatever we use is valuable.
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco Firepower NGFW, Cisco Firepower Next-Generation Firewall, FirePOWER, Cisco NGFWv
CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point vSEC, CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point Virtual Systems, Check Point CloudGuard Network Security
Learn More
Netgate
Video Not Available
Overview

Cisco NGFW firewalls deliver advanced threat defense capabilities to meet diverse needs, from
small/branch offices to high performance data centers and service providers. Available in a wide
range of models, Cisco NGFW can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Advanced threat
defense capabilities include Next-generation IPS (NGIPS), Security Intelligence (SI), Advanced
Malware Protection (AMP), URL filtering, Application Visibility and Control (AVC), and flexible VPN
features. Inspect encrypted traffic and enjoy automated risk ranking and impact flags to reduce event
volume so you can quickly prioritize threats. Cisco NGFW firewalls are also available with clustering
for increased performance, high availability configurations, and more.
Cisco Firepower NGFWv is the virtualized version of Cisco's Firepower NGFW firewall. Widely
deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco NGFWv automatically scales up/down to meet
the needs of dynamic cloud environments and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco NGFWv
can deliver micro-segmentation to protect east-west network traffic.
Cisco firewalls provide consistent security policies, enforcement, and protection across all your
environments. Unified management for Cisco ASA and FTD/NGFW physical and virtual firewalls is
delivered by Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO), with cloud logging also available. And with Cisco
SecureX included with every Cisco firewall, you gain a cloud-native platform experience that enables
greater simplicity, visibility, and efficiency.
Learn more about Cisco’s firewall solutions, including virtual appliances for public and private cloud.

Check Point CloudGuard provides unified cloud native security for all your assets and workloads, giving you the confidence to automate security, prevent threats, and manage posture – everywhere – across your multi-cloud environment.

Providing comprehensive network security solutions for the enterprise, large business and SOHO, pfSense solutions bring together the most advanced technology available to make protecting your network easier than ever before. Our products are built on the most reliable platforms and are engineered to provide the highest levels of performance, stability and confidence.
Offer
Learn more about Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall
Learn more about Check Point CloudGuard Network Security
Learn more about pfSense
Sample Customers
Rackspace, The French Laundry, Downer Group, Lewisville School District, Shawnee Mission School District, Lower Austria Firefighters Administration, Oxford Hospital, SugarCreek, Westfield
Physicians Choice Laboratory Services, Helvetica Insurance
Nerds On Site Inc., RKC Development Inc., Expertech, Fisher's Technology, Ncisive, Consulting, CPURX, Vaughn's Computer House Calls, Imeretech LLC, Digital Crisis, Carolina Digital Phone, Technigogo Technology Services, The Simple Solution, SwiftecITInc, Rocky Mountain Tech Team, Free Range Geeks, Alaska Computer Geeks, Lark Information Technology, Renaissance Systems Inc., Cutting Edge Computers, Caretech LLC, GoVanguard, Network Touch Ltd, P.C. Solutions.Net, Vision Voice and Data Systems LLC, Montgomery Technologies, Techforce, Concero Networks, ASONInc, CPS Electronics and Consulting, Darkwire.net LLC, IT Specialists, MBS-Net Inc., VOICE1 LLC, Advantage Networking Inc., Powerhouse Systems, Doxa Multimedia Inc., Pro Computer Service, Virtual IT Services, A&J Computers Inc., Envision IT LLC, CommunicaONE Inc., Bone Computer Inc., Amax Engineering Corporation, QPG Ltd. Co., IT 101 Inc., Perfect Cloud Solutions, Applied Technology Group Inc., The Digital Sun Group LLC, Firespring
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider23%
Financial Services Firm17%
Manufacturing Company9%
Non Profit9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider35%
Computer Software Company20%
Government6%
Educational Organization4%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Government12%
Computer Software Company12%
Program Development Consultancy8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider31%
Computer Software Company26%
Government5%
Financial Services Firm4%
REVIEWERS
University10%
Comms Service Provider10%
Computer Software Company8%
Construction Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider42%
Computer Software Company15%
Government5%
Media Company5%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business41%
Midsize Enterprise28%
Large Enterprise31%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business13%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise74%
REVIEWERS
Small Business38%
Midsize Enterprise27%
Large Enterprise36%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business9%
Midsize Enterprise59%
Large Enterprise33%
REVIEWERS
Small Business72%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business58%
Midsize Enterprise12%
Large Enterprise30%
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. pfSense and other solutions. Updated: July 2021.
522,693 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 31 reviews while pfSense is ranked 2nd in Firewalls with 40 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.4, while pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "Unified Security Management has enabled us to combine our on-prem appliances and cloud environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of pfSense writes "Feature-rich, well documented, and there is good support available online". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco ASA Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire and Sophos XG, whereas pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos UTM, Untangle NG Firewall and Juniper SRX. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. pfSense report.

See our list of best Firewalls vendors.

We monitor all Firewalls 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.