We performed a comparison between Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] and Meraki MX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The stability of the solution is excellent, as it is with other Fortinet products."
"Their interface is very easy to use, it is without bugs."
"From the firewall perspective, the rules and policies are very sufficient and easy to use."
"There are lots of features and most of them are deployed for internet security. Users are protected if they accidentally go to some malicious sites."
"The next-gen features, the unified threat management capabilities are something that just about everybody is interested in at this point."
"The user interface (UI) is very, very good."
"Security solution with a straightforward and quick setup. It's a stable and scalable product."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the rules and quality of service."
"It provides visibility and drives organizational security."
"The UTM platform has been the most valuable."
"The most valuable feature for us was to implement negligent functionality, to direct functionality to viewer control and application control so we could disconnect, and at the same time, we installed checkpoints. We disconnected our proxy."
"Firewalls help us a lot in controlling traffic on our network and preventing unauthorized access."
"The solution is very robust."
"The filtering was very good."
"The most outstanding feature is being able to centralize each of the functions in a single device."
"It safeguards against cyber attacks."
"You can use your web browser to do the configuration which is easier than Cisco CLI transcripts."
"The simplicity of configuration is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Traffic Shaping: The device lets you decide how you want to use your internet services. Due to the fact that Meraki can accept dual WAN, you can decide the way you balance the data traffic."
"I use Meraki in my POCs and with my customers as well."
"Simple to manage."
"Both the scalability and the scalability are great with Meraki MX."
"The technical support people from Meraki are brilliant."
"Deployment takes no more than one working day."
"Scalability for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be improved. SD-WAN security for this solution also needs some improvement."
"They have to just improve its performance when we enable all UTM features. When you enable all the features, the performance of FortiGate, as well as of Sophos and SonicWall, goes down."
"It's my understanding that more of the current generation features could be brought in. There could be more integration with EDRs, for example."
"There are some cloud-based features that could be much more flexible than they currently are."
"FortiOS is not simple."
"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 doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"As we don't have a representative of Check Point in Mozambique, this makes it very difficult when we have some issues to resolve."
"Some features that could be improved are advanced threat protection, sandboxing, and vulnerability management."
"Specifically on the user experience, sometimes the set up of things, such as the VPN SSL, takes a lot of time to load and a lot of time to get up and running on every session."
"The interface needs improvement."
"Technical support was very bad because the supplier who sold it to us, wasn't very supportive, and he wouldn't giving us direct links to the OEM."
"What has been the issue of firewalls is they ask me for policies and content filtering application control and all these features that are now part of Harmony."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"I am not able to see a demo."
"Pricing is an area where the solution lacks since it is an expensive tool."
"Meraki MX firewalls are great for small to medium-sized businesses, but other solutions are better for enterprise-sized companies."
"Could possibly use deeper configurations."
"They need to improve the link between Meraki and Active Directory."
"It would be great if the Meraki devices let us see, in real time, the internet demand on a single device."
"Meraki MX can come across as an expensive solution."
"When we do API integrations with Meraki, they have always been hard as well as tedious to build. The data that we want out of the API integrations has been only recently available. Six months ago, it was hard to get someone to build something correctly or useful with Meraki APIs. Recently, they have made more data available on the API, but it is just a start. They need to do more."
"You can only have one tunnel in the whole infrastructure — one tunnel with one device."
Earn 20 points
Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 19 reviews while Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 57 reviews. Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is rated 8.2, while Meraki MX is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] writes "Great firewalls, VPN, and Intrusion prevention capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". Check Point UTM-1 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Netgate pfSense.
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.
