Anonymous UserNetwork, Systems and Security Engineer at SOLTEL Group
Saurabh BhattacharyaSenior Infrastructure Engineer at a retailer
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"It has reduced the number of people on the network team along with the system engineer involved in the security process. So, it is valuable."
"From a distributed firewall perspective, it's a solid solution."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create, develop, and deploy servers in minutes to hours, rather than days."
"The most valuable features for us at this early stage are the interface and the integration with existing VMware solutions."
"The most valuable features are security and dynamic routing."
"This is the most scalable product of its type."
"From a security standpoint, the customer was able to better secure critical workloads while routing L2/L3 worked normally, giving them more confidence that they would be ready for any potential security incident mitigation or outage (DR)."
"The most valuable features are stability and low cost."
"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."
"We would to have a reverse proxy. This would add great value to the solution."
"We would like better integration with the standards on the market. For example, with OSPF, their integration in NSX is very low. It's not a full OSPF integration. It is too thin from a protocol perspective."
"It could be cheaper!"
"Everybody needs a network to connect to, and VMware doesn't readily provide one."
"I would like to see automation capabilities in the deployment process."
"The training costs a minimum of $3,000, which is expensive and should be reduced."
"Traffic flow introspection topology visibility is definitely needed because at the moment, NSX-T lacks in this area."
"There are always issues integrating with Cisco."
"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."
"We can't go without NSX, so it's invaluable from this perspective."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The licensing fees are expensive and we pay on a yearly basis."
"It is an expensive product, but cheaper than some competing solutions."
"The price of this product is too high."
"This solution requires a licence."
"VMware NSX is expensive and everything is licensed. We have to pay for each individual feature."
"The price is based on the virtual desktop infrastructure(VDI) side and also is dependant on the size of the environment. The price is expensive and it could attract more purchasers in smaller organisations if it was reduced."
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.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 1st in Cloud and Data Center Security with 30 reviews while VMware NSX is ranked 3rd in Cloud and Data Center Security with 20 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.4, while VMware NSX is rated 7.8. 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 VMware NSX writes "Allows for seamless micro-segmentation and the support is exceptional". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco ASA Firewall and WatchGuard Firebox, whereas VMware NSX is most compared with Cisco ACI, Nutanix Flow, Cisco Secure Workload, Guardicore Centra and Ansible. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. VMware NSX report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security 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.