Compare Check Point Virtual Systems vs. FortiGate-VM

Check Point Virtual Systems is ranked 16th in Firewalls with 11 reviews while FortiGate-VM is ranked 15th in Firewalls with 10 reviews. Check Point Virtual Systems is rated 8.2, while FortiGate-VM is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Check Point Virtual Systems writes "Reliable solution with a unique architecture that creates flexibility in the deployment ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FortiGate-VM writes "Can use the appliance as a WLAN controller for up to 10 access points". Check Point Virtual Systems is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, pfSense and Cisco ASA NGFW, whereas FortiGate-VM is most compared with pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate and Meraki MX Firewalls. See our Check Point Virtual Systems vs. FortiGate-VM report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco ASA NGFW Logo
69,853 views|52,220 comparisons
FortiGate-VM Logo
4,736 views|3,463 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Moraima Matilda
Anonymous User
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Virtual Systems vs. FortiGate-VM and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
383,162 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
For us, the most valuable features are the IPX and the Sourcefire Defense Center module. That gives us visibility into the traffic coming in and going out, and gives us the heads-up if there is a potential outbreak or potential malicious user who is trying to access the site. It also helps us see traffic generated by an end device trying to reach out to the world.The information coming from Talos does a good job... I like the fact that Cisco is working with them and getting the information from them and updating the firewall.The firepower sensors have been great; they do a good job of dropping unwanted traffic.Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good.The most important point is the detection engine which is now part of the next-generation firewalls and which is supported by Cisco Talos.The most valuable feature of this solution is AMP (Advanced Malware Protection), as this is really needed to protect against cyber threats.I like the Cisco ASDM (Adaptive Security Device Manager), which is the configuration interface for the Cisco firewall.The technical team is always available when we have problems.

Read more »

The most valuable feature for us is the cluster support.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.A unique architecture makes this product stand out from other solutions.The IPS, application and URL filtering, as well as Identity Awareness, are all very valuable features.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 program is very stable.The most valuable feature of this solution is that you can start off with a simple firewall and expand it to UTM.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.

Read more »

It handles our current load with ease, and I think it can handle a bit more. It definitely can handle a lot more capacity than we currently use.It is very useful to make lists for rules and prepare firewall rules.The customer care center of Fortinet is good. For all the requests that we have done, they work as fast as possible, so this is a good point for Fortinet.​There is an interesting possibility of building a tunnel to a firewall from access points. We use this feature for small branch offices with one to two employees with access to central RDP servers.One top feature is the ability to use the appliance as a WLAN controller for up to 10 access points with the new 5.6 firmware.A top feature is the really good web interface and the classic Fortinet features, such as IPS, IDS, AV scanner, and spam filter.​Initial setup was quite straightforward, as we can simply head to the required sections to apply the planned network.​We use it to ensure that our network is properly protected from viruses and malware.

Read more »

Cons
We were also not too thrilled when Cisco announced that in the upcoming new-gen ASA, iOS was not going to be supported, or if you install them, they will not be able to be managed through the Sourcefire. However, it seems like Cisco is moving away from the ASA iOS to the Sourcefire FireSIGHT firmware for the ASA. We haven't had a chance to test it out.Our latest experience with a code upgrade included a number of bugs and issues that we ran into. So more testing with their code, before it hits us, would help.The software was very buggy, to the point it had to be removed.In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.Most users do not have awareness of this product's functionality and features. Cisco should do something to make them aware of them. That would be quite excellent and useful to organizations that are still using legacy data-center-security products.I have found that Cisco reporting capabilities are not as rich as other products, so the reporting could be improved.The Sandbox and the Web Censoring in this solution need to be improved.It will be nice if they had what you traditionally would use a web application scanner for. If the solution could take a deeper look into HTTP and HTTPS traffic, that would be nice.

Read more »

Our biggest complaint concerns the high resource usage for IDP/IPS, as we cannot turn on all of the features even with new hardware.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.It can be difficult to install properly without prior trainingSometimes, 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.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.It is a very expensive program and there are additional costs despite the standard licensing fees.The management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use.The initial setup is difficult. It took me three tries to get it right. The setup took two or three hours.

Read more »

The GUI could be improved.The price is sometimes very expensive.​In the first two releases of FortiOS 5.6, we had some trouble with the SSL VPN service. Sometimes it stopped working, and the IPS daemon too.Improvements are needed for the responsive UI and JIT traffic reporting.The management tools should be more user-friendly.We encountered scalability issues in IPSec Module. The tunnels freeze sometimes.There were challenges during setup, and many of them were self-inflicted.The user interface (UI) and the performance of interface both need improvement.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Pricing varies on the model and the features we are using. It could be anywhere from $600 to $1000 to up to $7,000 per year, depending on what model and what feature sets are available to us.We used Check Point and the two are comparable. Cost was really what put us onto the ASAs... the price tag for Check Point was exorbitantly more than what it is for the ASA solution.Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.We are in the process of renewing our three-year license, which costs approximately $24,000 USD for the thirty-six months.The pricing for Cisco products is higher than others, but Cisco is a very good, strong, and stable technology.The program is very expensive.The cost of this solution is high.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.

Read more »

We pay approximately ‎€150,000 ($166,000 USD) per year.It is more expensive than other solutions and would be more competetive in the market if it came down in price.On average, it is normally on the lower end, being less expensive than Palo Alto or Cisco.

Read more »

The price: It is a bit higher than the other competitors. This is why I started to look at other brands.​The basic pricing in Austria is OK, but asking for special offers, e.g., NPOs, NGOs, trade up, and/or trade in, is always useful.​The price is expensive compared with other vendors, like Cisco and Huawei.The best part of Fortinet is the license is bundled together, so it is easy to use and apply.The pricing and licensing are not as expensive as its competitors.​It is on par with what you receive. It can be expensive upfront.It would be nice to have the ability to extend FortiGuard subscriptions at a reasonable yearly cost versus a bulk three year pricing.​It is an expensive solution if you are migrating from an open source solution.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
383,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Comparisons
Compared 38% of the time.
Compared 30% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Also Known As
Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire FirewallsCheck Point VSXFortiGate Virtual Appliance
Learn
Cisco
Check Point
Fortinet
Overview

Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) is Cisco's end-to-end software solution and core operating system that powers the Cisco ASA product series. This software solution provides enterprise-level firewall capabilities for all types of ASA products, including blades, standalone appliances and virtual devices. Adaptive Security Appliance provides protection to organizations of all sizes, and allows end-users to access information securely anywhere, at any time, and through any device.

Adaptive Security Appliance is also fully compatible with other key security technologies, and so provides organizations with an all-encompassing security solution.

Block more threats and quickly mitigate those that do breach your defenses with the industry’s first threat-focused NGFW.

Check Point Virtual Systems taps the power of virtualization to consolidate and simplify security for private clouds while delivering a lower total cost of ownership. It enables customized security against evolving network threats with the extensible Software Blade Architecture. Virtual Systems is supported on Check Point Appliances, including the 61000 Security System as well as open servers.

Learn more about Virtual systems

FortiGate Virtual Appliances allow you to mitigate blind spots by implementing critical security controls within your virtual infrastructure. They also allow you to rapidly provision security infrastructure whenever and wherever it is needed. FortiGate virtual appliances feature all of the security and networking services common to traditional hardware-based FortiGate appliances. With the addition of virtual appliances from Fortinet, you can deploy a mix of hardware and virtual appliances, operating together and managed from a common centralized management platform.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about Check Point Virtual Systems
Learn more about FortiGate-VM
Sample Customers
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.Bentley Systems, Almaviva TSF S.p.A, Yankuang Group, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.Security7 Networks, COOPENAE
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Manufacturing Company11%
Comms Service Provider9%
University7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company29%
Comms Service Provider16%
Media Company8%
Retailer5%
REVIEWERS
Government29%
Financial Services Firm29%
Wholesaler/Distributor14%
Non Profit14%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company43%
Comms Service Provider14%
Media Company8%
Financial Services Firm4%
No Data Available
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business35%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise40%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business35%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise45%
REVIEWERS
Small Business53%
Midsize Enterprise7%
Large Enterprise40%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Virtual Systems vs. FortiGate-VM and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
383,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email