Compare Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Sophos UTM

Check Point Virtual Systems is ranked 22nd in Firewalls with 9 reviews while Sophos UTM is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 24 reviews. Check Point Virtual Systems is rated 8.2, while Sophos UTM is rated 8.4. 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 Sophos UTM writes "Has a solid state hard drive and can boot in less than sixty seconds". Check Point Virtual Systems is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Firepower NGFW, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, pfSense and Sophos XG, whereas Sophos UTM is most compared with pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall and Meraki MX . See our Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Sophos UTM report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco ASA NGFW Logo
68,080 views|51,092 comparisons
Sophos UTM Logo
64,684 views|52,425 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Anonymous User
Anonymous User
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Sophos UTM and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
430,376 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
Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good.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.It's easy to integrate ASA with other Cisco security products. When you understand the technology, it's not a big deal. It's very simple.The benefits we see from the ASA are connected to teleworking as well as, of course, having the basic functionality of a firewall in place and the prevention of attacks.On the network side, where you create your rules for allowing traffic — what can come inside and what can go out — that works perfectly, if you know what you want to achieve. It protects you.If you have a solution that is creating a script and you need to deploy many implementations, you can create a script in the device and it will be the same for all. After that, you just have to do the fine tuning.They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home functionality.

More Cisco ASA NGFW Pros »

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.

More Check Point Virtual Systems Pros »

We find all of the features valuable because together they fit the needs of our customers.It allows me to easily connect with more than forty-five remote sites and more than fifty remote users between IPsec and SSL VPN, applying the web filter and application filter to ensure a secure connection.Configuration troubleshooting is eased by the use of the color-coded, live firewall log.The features that I've known to be most valuable are both the web security features as well as the web firewall capabilities. As a partner of Sophos firewall, we have some clients and they are using Sophos firewall UTM and we are using it as well.Sophos UTM has improved the porting section. It has improved security by seeing the gaps. For example, when you discover that an entry has been using a certain application, with Sophos UTM acting as a Layer 7 firewall, you can block the application, not the port.The most valuable feature is the IPS. It also protects us from malware.UTM 9 brings along IPSec as well as iPhone and iPad support. This seems small but it’s useful.The isolation of infected machines is a big feature. Also, the ability to detect external sources that change files on a file server is really big.

More Sophos UTM Pros »

Cons
In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.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.If I want to activate IPS features on it, I have to buy another license. If I want Cisco AnyConnect, I have to buy another license. That's where we have challenges.Cisco missed the mark with all the configuration steps. They are a pain and, when doing them, it looks as if we're using a very old technology — yet the technology itself is not old, it's very good. But the front-end configuration is very tough.Cisco provides us with application visibility and control, although it's not a complete solution compared to other vendors. Cisco needs to work on the application behavior side of things, in particular when it comes to the behavior of SSL traffic.It is expensive.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.

More Cisco ASA NGFW Cons »

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.

More Check Point Virtual Systems Cons »

We would like to have unique viewable IDs for rules and in the packet filter logfile, for easier debugging of old log files.I would like to see the SD-WAN feature improved.Support for IKEv2 is needed in this solution.The only time we face a problem or issues is when we place a ticket. We have found that response is very slow.With Sophos UTM, there is a general rule in the firewall when the country blocking can block some countries from accessing your data. In the current version, you still need to add it by putting in the IP range. This feature would be helpful for administrators and it gives them the advantage to block stuff in less time.The solution could be improved by adding cloud soundboxing.We didn’t find any issues but I know there have been some in the last few years.It does have built-in policies, which enable you to disable USB devices, etc. It would be nice if they had more policies because there are not that many of them.

More Sophos UTM Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.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.Cisco is expensive, but you do get benefits for the price.In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco.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.

More Cisco ASA NGFW 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 »

This solution is less expensive than FortiGate.The biggest issue with Sophos is the pricing. It's definitely more expensive. As I said, we looked at Webroot, which is a big alternative, and Sophos was almost three times the price of Webroot. That's a pretty big difference.We purchased the appliance with five years onsite support and licenses.Pricing for the upgrade was very competitive as Sophos wanted to retain existing customers.Sometimes more is less, meaning if you want more than three features, take the FullGuard licence.The pricing and licensing are both good and better than Sophos's competitors. This is why we went with the product.The AWS Marketplace product should be a better fit, but it is a little pricier.Purchasing through the AWS Marketplace is pretty straightforward. Because were entirely on AWS and don't have anything anywhere else. It made the most sense for us as a one stop shop.

More Sophos UTM Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
430,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Popular Comparisons
Compared 36% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Compared 31% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Also Known As
Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire FirewallsCheck Point VSXAstaro
Learn
Cisco
Check Point
Sophos
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

The global network of highly skilled researchers and analysts, protecting businesses from known and emerging malware - viruses, rootkits and spyware.
Offer
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about Check Point Virtual Systems
Learn more about Sophos UTM
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.One Housing Group
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Manufacturing Company10%
Comms Service Provider9%
University8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider21%
Media Company7%
Government5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm29%
Government29%
Healthcare Company14%
Non Profit14%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company39%
Comms Service Provider20%
Media Company6%
Government4%
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider11%
Financial Services Firm11%
Healthcare Company11%
Construction Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider25%
Computer Software Company23%
Media Company9%
Government5%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business35%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise40%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business31%
Midsize Enterprise22%
Large Enterprise47%
REVIEWERS
Small Business53%
Midsize Enterprise7%
Large Enterprise40%
REVIEWERS
Small Business62%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise20%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business65%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise14%
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Sophos UTM and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
430,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.