We performed a comparison between Check Point Power-1 [EOL] and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is the simple configuration."
"I like that you are able to manage FortiGate from the FortiManager to create a more centralized environment."
"Good performance, stability, and virtual domain ability."
"This solution has solid UTM features combined with a nice GUI."
"The most valuable feature is the interface, which is very user friendly. We are utilizing most of the features, like content filtering. The firewall is powerful."
"The most valuable feature of FortiGate is FortiView which provides proactive monitoring."
"The VPN allows users to connect remotely and securely."
"I like the UI. Most things are accessible from the user interface and it is quite user-friendly. With respect to both VM-based firewalls and physical firewalls, it's easy to create updates."
"It is an easy-to-scale product."
"Centralized management is valuable because it allows us to configure settings in one location and apply them across all three locations."
"It is reliable and the support is very good."
"With the improved visibility we now have, the traffic is being properly monitored, which means that we are better able to manage it. These are improvements that we saw very quickly."
"Using Palo Alto Networks Panorama, we were able to deploy a single point of management and visualization of the firewall infrastructure in cloud, on-premise and integrated with Azure to automate scale up. Its security features, i.e. anti-malware, threat prevention, URL Filtering, VPN, and antivirus are the most valuable. The ID-User integrated with AD and 2FA features are also very useful to provide secure access to servers and some users in the company. "
"The VM series has an advantage over the physical version because we are able to change the sources that the machine has, such as the amount of available RAM."
"It has a good performance which helps you with the stability of your virtual environment."
"The web-cache feature which was previously on the FortiGate device, but was deleted with the recent upgrade should be returned. It was a very valuable feature for us."
"I could not configure sFlow from the FortiGate graphical user interface. I realized that the sFlow configuration is available only from the CLI, and discovered that sFlow is not supported on virtual interfaces, such as VDOM links, IPsec, or GRE."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having more capabilities for troubleshooting VPN connections. For example, I do get some feedback about the current status, but I could use some history and logging of important events. The information is logged in our Syslog server, but I could use that information from the device. If they could provide a GUI to have some more insight on what's going with my VPN would be useful."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having better visibility. Palo Alto has better visibility."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"I haven't had a single issue since using Fortinet."
"Fortigate's hardware capacities could be improved."
"Some configuration elements cannot be easily altered once created."
"Multi-factor authentication would have been a plus in security at the time."
"The web interface is very slow, and it needs to be faster."
"At the beginning of the implementation, we had some difficulties with the scripts, but Palo Alto Networks support together with a local partner finally fixed it."
"There's room for improvement in terms of integration with the load balancer. It isn't like Fortinet, which has a load balancer built into its firewall. It is effortless to integrate within the load balancer-plus-firewall solution."
"In the next release, I would like to see better integration of multi-factor authentication vendors."
"They made only a halfhearted attempt to put in DLP (Data Loss Prevention)."
"It can definitely improve on the performance."
"We feel that the setup was complex. So, we asked the tech team about the setup process. They explained how to deploy it in the right way, which made it very simple."
"There are some delays that I have observed when my company communicates with Palo Alto's support engineers."
Earn 20 points
Check Point Power-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 2 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 52 reviews. Check Point Power-1 [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Check Point Power-1 [EOL] writes "Good intrusion prevention, firewall, and VPN capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Check Point Power-1 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Juniper SRX Series Firewall.
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.