Compare Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Fortinet FortiGate-VM

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Jonathan LELOU
Anonymous User
Dhsrms Fff
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Fortinet FortiGate-VM and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
438,560 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
"The user interface is easy to navigate.""It is very stable compared to other firewall products.""The management aspect of the product is very straightforward.""The best features are stability and scalability.""Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good.""The most valuable feature must be AnyConnect. We have quite a few customers who use it. It is easy to use and the stablest thing that we have. We have experienced some issues on all our VPN clients, but AnyConnect has been the stablest one.""The traffic inspection and the Firepower engine are the most valuable features. It gives you full details, application details, traffic monitoring, and the threats. It gives you all the containers the user is using, especially at the application level. The solution also provides application visibility and control.""If we look at the Cisco ASA without Firepower, then one of the most valuable features is the URL filtering."

More Cisco ASA Firewall Pros »

"The main benefit of the Check Point Virtual Systems solution is its ability to split up the hardware appliances that we have into several logical, virtual devices with separate traffic handling policies, as well as the switching and routing.""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."

More Check Point Virtual Systems Pros »

"The EPM bundle is a good feature.""The most valuable features of this solution are the integration within the environment, with centralized reporting.""The VM it's very quick for deployment. If we need to have a POC for a customer, if we don't have any hardware physically at our premises, at our store, in our office, we can download the VM from Fortinet and install all the VM to their environment in order to run it. If we have a customer that says "let's start tomorrow" we are able to do that in a way that's not possible with a hardware version.""The user interface, stability, and scalability are the most valuable features.""Web filtering and the IPS functionality.""The solution is very easy to set up. It doesn't take a lot of time and offers a quick deployment, so you can start using it almost right away.""The user interface is the most valuable aspect of the solution.""We are able to closely monitor the usages of individual users and see their usage habits and other items, including the data itself, which gives us quite a bit of visibility."

More Fortinet FortiGate-VM Pros »

Cons
"The annual subscription cost is a bit high. They should try to make it comparable to other offerings. We have a number of Chinese products here in Pakistan, which are already, very cheap and have less annual maintenance costs compared to Cisco.""They need a user-friendly interface that we could easily configure.""It would be nice if you didn't have to configure using a command-line interface. It's a bit technical that way.""You shouldn't have to use the ASDM to help manage the client.""In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.""One of the problems that we have had is the solution requires Java to work. This has caused some problems with the application visibility and control. When the Java works, it is good, but Java wasn't a good choice. I don't like the Java implementation. It can be difficult to work with sometimes.""Security generally requires integration with many devices, and the management side of that process could be enhanced somewhat. It would help if there was a clear view of the integrations and what the easiest way to do them is.""One area where the ASA could be improved is that it doesn't have AMP. When you get an ASA with the Firepower model, ASA with FTD, then you have advanced malware protection."

More Cisco ASA Firewall Cons »

"As an administrator, I can say that among all of the Check Point products I have been working with so far, the Virtual Systems solution is one of the most difficult.""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 training""Sometimes, 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."

More Check Point Virtual Systems Cons »

"Deployment can be difficult and they could dispense with reliance on FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer.""Compatibility and integration with other products or vendors such as Cisco SD-WAN products need improvement.""The licensing needs to be improved. We need longer licensing periods, especially for POCs and trials. It should be for six months. Right now, it's too short of a timeframe.""Not a ten because I think that Cisco is better.""VM should be more optimized.""The price model is not transparent by any means and should be made more clear. What's included in the packages is often not very obvious.""The solution is fairly complex.""The one thing that could be improved is the integration with the exchange. The gateway level controls can be enhanced a bit more. For example, it's still little here and there. You do get malicious attacks and suspicious emails like spam. It's not like Sophos where we got a lot of spam email, and yet, it's still relatively vulnerable. It can be upgraded, maybe with a fifth-generation firmware that it is ready for unknown threats."

More Fortinet FortiGate-VM Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"We pay about $200 yearly and we have two firewalls.""It's very competitive with other products.""Cisco is considered to be an expensive solution.""Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.""The licensing is a bit off because the physical firewall is cheaper than the virtual one. We only have the physical ones as they are cheaper than the virtual ones. We only use the physical firewalls because of the price difference.""There is room for improvement in the pricing when compared to the market. Although, when you compare the benefits of support from Cisco, you can adjust the value and it becomes comparable, because you usually need very good support. So you gain value there with this device.""When it comes to Cisco, the price of everything is higher. Cisco firewalls are expensive, but we get support from Cisco, and that support is very active.""It's a brilliant firewall, and the fact that it comes with a perpetual license really does go far in terms of helping the organization in not having to deal with those costs on an annual basis. That is a pain point when it comes to services like the ones we have on Fortigate. That's where we really give Cisco firewalls the thumbs up."

More Cisco ASA Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice »

"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."

More Check Point Virtual Systems Pricing and Cost Advice »

"It's not a cheap solution but it comes with its benefits.""There is a benefit in terms of the cost of using this solution because the price is very good.""The price is similar to Symantec Endpoint, but it's more expensive than Forcepoint solutions. Fortinet is better than Forcepoint.""This solution is very expensive.""The price of this product is great compared to others."

More Fortinet FortiGate-VM Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
438,560 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Fortinet FGs: Great devices, relatively easy to deploy and maintain. Cheaper than most devices of their kind. If you're… more »
Top Answer: They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home… more »
Top Answer: In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco.
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Top Answer: The functionality provided is very good.
Top Answer: Fortigate is cheaper if you compare it to Palo Alto, a main competitor.
Top Answer: As we just began implementing the solution, I'm not sure if there are any features missing. We haven't come across any… more »
Popular Comparisons
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Also Known As
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAvCheck Point VSXFortiGate Virtual Appliance, FortiGate-VM
Learn
Cisco
Check Point
Fortinet
Overview

Cisco ASA firewalls deliver enterprise-class firewall functionality with highly scalable and flexible VPN capabilities to meet diverse needs, from small/branch offices to high performance data centers and service providers. Available in a wide range of models, Cisco ASA can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Flexible VPN capabilities include support for remote access, site-to-site, and clientless VPN. Also, select appliances support clustering for increased performance, VPN load balancing to optimize available resources, advanced high availability configurations, and more.

Cisco ASAv is the virtualized version of the Cisco ASA firewall. Widely deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco ASAv is ideal for remote worker and multi-tenant environments. The solution scales up/down to meet performance requirements and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco ASAv can deliver micro-segmentation to protect east-west network traffic.

Cisco firewalls provide consistent security policies, enforcement, and protection across all your environments. Unified management for Cisco ASA and FTD/NGFW physical and virtual firewalls is delivered by Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO), with cloud logging also available. And with Cisco SecureX included with every Cisco firewall, you gain a cloud-native platform experience that enables greater simplicity, visibility, and efficiency.

Learn more about Cisco’s firewall solutions, including virtual appliances for public and private cloud.

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 Firewall
Learn more about Check Point Virtual Systems
Learn more about Fortinet 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 Firm19%
Comms Service Provider13%
Manufacturing Company10%
University7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider23%
Media Company6%
Government5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm25%
Government25%
Healthcare Company13%
Non Profit13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company39%
Comms Service Provider21%
Media Company6%
Construction Company4%
REVIEWERS
Media Company18%
Comms Service Provider9%
Construction Company9%
Aerospace/Defense Firm9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company33%
Comms Service Provider25%
Government7%
K 12 Educational Company Or School6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business35%
Midsize Enterprise24%
Large Enterprise41%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business29%
Midsize Enterprise24%
Large Enterprise47%
REVIEWERS
Small Business50%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise38%
REVIEWERS
Small Business52%
Midsize Enterprise28%
Large Enterprise20%
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Fortinet FortiGate-VM and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
438,560 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Check Point Virtual Systems is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 10 reviews while Fortinet FortiGate-VM is ranked 13th in Firewalls with 20 reviews. Check Point Virtual Systems is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiGate-VM is rated 8.0. 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 Fortinet FortiGate-VM writes "Clearly captures each and every thing for the backup capture". Check Point Virtual Systems is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire and pfSense, whereas Fortinet FortiGate-VM is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, pfSense, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, OPNsense and Untangle NG Firewall. See our Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Fortinet FortiGate-VM report.

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.