We performed a comparison between Check Point IPS and Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Check Point IPS is the management of devices and policies."
"The integration is a valuable feature."
"There's an automatic update after every 2 hours which makes sure that the database is up to date and providing zero-day vulnerability protection."
"I can easily monitor all of our connected devices and I get instant notification of reconnections and new connections, which removes some of the monitoring burden."
"Protection in real-time is very good. It helps us detect things on time and make decisions to improve perimeter security."
"The Check Point IPS feature I find the most valuable is the firewall. It is great and easy to work with."
"It protects against specific known exploits but also, with SandBlast integration, it is able to protect against unknown or zero-day attacks at the perimeter level."
"The most valuable feature is that it protects us against hundreds of different attack vectors, like ransomware. The protection is always being triggered. People try to access websites that are categorized as malware, so when the users do a DNS request for the IP of those malware websites, the IPS Blade replaces the real IP of the website that is malware with a bogus IP. The user gets an IP that doesn't exist and when he tries to access, it won't work."
"Most of the features of Palo Alto Threat Prevention are alright. I recommend features like content filtering, IP address, & intelligent firewalls. The reporting feature is very good."
"The application control and vulnerability protection are the most valuable features."
"We are currently using the URL filtering feature, which is the most popular."
"The most valuable features are the simplicity, transparency, and overall ease of management."
"For those who want a next-gen firewall that's easy to configure and easy to operate, I think you should go for Palo Alto."
"I find the malware protection very handy."
"The most valuable features are that it's user-friendly, has interesting features, URL filtering, and threat prevention."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It's quite easy. Deployment took one to two weeks."
"The pain point that I have with this solution is contacting technical support."
"There is an issue with precision."
"The cost is high."
"The installation documentation has room for improvement."
"Setting up Check Point IPS isn't easy, but it's not too complex, either. I rate it seven out of 10 for ease of setup. Generally, customers cannot do it themselves. They need an integrator."
"The hardware-based version of Check Point IPS could be more scalable. Right now, it's not scalable."
"Despite being a blade, this is expensive."
"Sometimes protections are 'aggregated' into a single threat name when you look at the logs. I would prefer to see all protections named individually (for example, right now, 'web enforcement' is a category that contains several signatures)."
"The solution needs to improve its local technical support services. There is no premium support offered in our market."
"The documentation needs to be improved. I need better information about how to configure it and what the best practices are."
"Sometimes when you want to group a set of ports, and communicate with Palo Alto, you cannot group TCP and UDP ports together. This needs to be adjusted."
"We are attempting to improve the use of URL filtering beyond threat protection."
"Right now we are focusing on email. If Palo Alto can increase the features related to email filtering and the new malware, it would help us protect our systems."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"The application’s pricing and dashboard need improvement. It could be user-friendly."
"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower. In comparison with other solutions, I believe they're quite competitive."
More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point IPS is ranked 3rd in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 45 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is ranked 6th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 24 reviews. Check Point IPS is rated 8.6, while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Check Point IPS writes "Great for detection and access with the capabilities of defining specific rules". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention writes "A good amount of granularity and advanced URL filtering capabilities". Check Point IPS is most compared with Darktrace, Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, Cisco NGIPS and Fortinet FortiGate IPS, whereas Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Arista NDR, Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System and Darktrace. See our Check Point IPS vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) 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.