We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN and SonicWall SMA based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has good performance."
"It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"Setup using the manuals was easy."
"For a basic setup, implementation is quite easy."
"I like the fact that Remote Access allows the administrator to control and manage things. It makes things smoother, and it has been an excellent experience."
"It keeps us safe when browsing the internet and when sharing confidential information with our colleagues."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN is a stable solution."
"I found the MEP feature the most valuable. This has improved users' latency allowing the users to connect to the nearest Azure Check Point VM."
"Organizations that already use the Check Point NGFW Solution do not require any additional hardware, which makes the implementation straightforward and reduces the time to go live."
"The solution has been solid for me for over five years."
"The management and the dashboard are the solution's most valuable features."
"I like the load balancing capability."
"What I like best about SonicWall SMA is the relationship between its features and its price, because the solution is both affordable and functional."
"I think they ask for a fair price."
"The performance is good."
"The solution is reliable and has good overall performance."
"Blocklisting and allowlisting are the most beneficial features for network security."
"This solution has many options for remote desktop and access."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"We would like to implement HTML5 (clientless access) in the product without installing any additional software."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN could be more user-friendly."
"There was complexity in the initial setup."
"I would like the support to be faster."
"They need to increase their timeout. Right now, it will fail after ten seconds, however, it shouldn't fail until after 20 seconds."
"The main feature that would be improved within Check Point Remote Access is its operation within Linux OS, as it currently does not have many features for that OS."
"When you want to deploy a new Check Point agent, it is really a pain in the butt. For example, Windows 10 now has updates almost every couple of months. It changes the versioning and things under the hood. These are things that I don't understand, because I'm not a Windows person. However, I know that the Check Point client is installed on the Windows machine, and if the Check Point client's not kept up-to-date, then it's functionality breaks. It has to be up-to-date with the Windows versions. Check Point has to update the client more often. Now, the problem is that the Check Point client is not easy to update on remote computers and it's not easy to deploy a new client."
"Sometimes it causes the consumption of machine resources, and also improves the scanning since they consume many resources in the clients' machines."
"I'd like to see the product maybe polish keyboards in Bookmark."
"Enhancing live tracking capabilities could improve the product, particularly in monitoring user activity and request statuses in real-time on the web interface."
"The only thing that they could try to improve is the support for enterprise customers. Normally enterprises and SMBs can create a ticket, but for enterprises, SonicWall SMA needs to provide a global view, and this is what's currently missing. It's not even a question of timing. It's a question of the global vision because currently, it's lacking. They concentrate on the topic, but not on the means and not on the global picture. In most cases, there's something wrong with the integration of SonicWall SMA with other products, so that could also be improved."
"The product's technical support services could be improved."
"The product itself is very good, but Dell needs to work on product visibility in their advertising."
"The timed synchronization between the network appliance needs improvement."
"SonicWall's reporting isn't good. Reports should be part of a data plan. The login mechanism should be improved. It would be helpful if the client could use an agent to log in. An agent-server model would improve the performance of the RDB, which consumes a lot of bandwidth."
"User interface could be improved."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 6th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 60 reviews while SonicWall SMA is ranked 21st in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 14 reviews. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while SonicWall SMA is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall SMA writes "It allows us to provide CML-based access to any user, but the reporting could be better". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Fortinet FortiClient and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, whereas SonicWall SMA is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, Cisco SD-WAN, SonicWall Netextender, Peplink SpeedFusion and SonicWall Connect Tunnel. See our Check Point Remote Access VPN vs. SonicWall SMA report.
See our list of best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.