Compare Check Point CloudGuard Network vs. Cisco ASA Firewall

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 vs. Cisco ASA Firewall and other solutions. Updated: March 2021.
476,163 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
"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 Pros »

"We moved from a legacy firewall to the ASA with FirePOWER, increasing our Internet Edge defense dramatically.""Integration with all the other Cisco tools is valuable.""The firewall power that comes with Cisco ASAv is the most valuable asset. They are are very easy to manage.""The web interface was easy for me. The configuration is logical, so it's easy to use and easy to understand how to protect, how to open a port, how to manage and how to route a device. That's why I prefer Cisco. It's robust and I never have issues with the hardware. That's why I choose Cisco and not another vendor.""The features I found most valuable in this solution, are the overall security features.""The basic setup is fine. We're just one person. It's only when you want to do some more sophisticated setup like channeling and stuff like that that it's more complicated.""We are using the Cisco AnyConnect for our end-user VPN with the ASA.""The most important feature is its categorization because on the site and social media you are unified in the way they are there."

More Cisco ASA Firewall Pros »

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 Cons »

"The product would be improved if the GUI could be brought into the 21st Century.""With regards to stability, we had a critical bug come out during our evaluation... not good.""We found it difficult to publish an antennae sidewalk with the ASDM. I think Cisco should improve this by creating a simpler interface for the firewall.""The service could use a little more web filtering. If I compare it to Cyberoam, Cyberoam has more the web filtering, so if you want to block a website, it's easier in other solutions than in Cisco.""It could also use a reporting dashboard.""The user interface is old fashioned.""I would like to see them release a patch for ASAv with cross-platform FirePower integration.""I see room for improvement when it comes to integrating all the devices into a central management system. Cisco doesn't provide this, but there are some good products in the market that can provide it."

More Cisco ASA Firewall Cons »

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 Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Watch out for hidden licensing and incredibly high annual maintenance costs.""I bought a license for three years and it was really affordable.""With AnyConnect, it depends on your license. It depends on the number of concurrent users you want to connect.""This solution might be expensive, but it is economical in the long run.""Some of our customers would be more likely to standardize on Cisco equipment if the cost was lower because a lot of people install cheap equipment.""The cost of this solution is high.""It would be nice if pricing could do more to reflect the economy of the country where the product is being implemented.""The program is very expensive."

More Cisco ASA Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
476,163 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Check Point CloudGuard technical support is good.
Top Answer: Check Point has moderate pricing. It's not the most expensive, however, it's also not the cheapest. Typically, when clients are looking for a solution, it comes down to the price.
Top Answer: The clustering and HE from the scaling availability could be improved. The documentation could be much better as well.
Top Answer:  When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage at large. In my opinion, Fortinet would be the best option and l use… more »
Top Answer: They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home functionality.
Top Answer: In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco.
Ranking
7th
out of 47 in Firewalls
Views
11,699
Comparisons
10,029
Reviews
24
Average Words per Review
952
Rating
8.6
3rd
out of 47 in Firewalls
Views
66,614
Comparisons
48,393
Reviews
75
Average Words per Review
589
Rating
8.0
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point vSEC, CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point Virtual Systems, Check Point CloudGuard Network Security
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv
Learn More
Overview

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.

Cisco ASA firewalls deliver enterprise-class firewall functionality with highly scalable and flexible VPN 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 ASA can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Flexible VPN capabilities include support for remote access, site-to-site, and clientless VPN. Also, select appliances support clustering for increased performance, VPN load balancing to optimize available resources, advanced high availability configurations, and more.

Cisco ASAv is the virtualized version of the Cisco ASA firewall. Widely deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco ASAv is ideal for remote worker and multi-tenant environments. The solution scales up/down to meet performance requirements and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco ASAv 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.

Offer
Learn more about Check Point CloudGuard Network
Learn more about Cisco ASA Firewall
Sample Customers
Physicians Choice Laboratory Services, Helvetica Insurance
There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Government14%
Computer Software Company14%
Financial Services Firm14%
Energy/Utilities Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider33%
Computer Software Company27%
Government4%
Media Company4%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm17%
Comms Service Provider14%
Manufacturing Company10%
Computer Software Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider35%
Computer Software Company21%
Government5%
Media Company4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business40%
Midsize Enterprise23%
Large Enterprise38%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise60%
Large Enterprise30%
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise26%
Large Enterprise38%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business27%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise55%
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard Network vs. Cisco ASA Firewall and other solutions. Updated: March 2021.
476,163 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Check Point CloudGuard Network is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 27 reviews while Cisco ASA Firewall is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 75 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network is rated 8.6, while Cisco ASA Firewall is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network writes "Unified Security Management has enabled us to combine our on-prem appliances and cloud environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco ASA Firewall writes "Gives us visibility into potential outbreaks as well as malicious users trying to access the site". Check Point CloudGuard Network is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Palo Alto Networks WildFire and pfSense, whereas Cisco ASA Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Meraki MX and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network vs. Cisco ASA Firewall 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.