We performed a comparison between Check Point VPN-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 solution is highly scalable because they have devices that can handle a large amount of traffic."
"Some of the valuable features are the firewall, IPS, web filter, and gateway capabilities. Additionally, it is easy to use and flexible."
"The most valuable feature is the FortiManager for centralized management."
"The most valuable feature is the interface, which is very user friendly. We are utilizing most of the features, like content filtering. The firewall is powerful."
"It is useful for protecting and segregating the internal networks from the internet. Most of our customers also use the FortiGate client to connect to their offices by using the VPN client, and of course, they usually activate the antivirus, deep inspection, and intrusion prevention services. They are also using it for web filtering and implementing various policies dealing with forwardings, NAT, etc."
"The network security and cloud security are most valuable."
"Fortinet offers the latest versions to cater to the needs of enterprises."
"The SD-WAN feature is the most valuable. This feature evolved from link load balancing. It has helped us in terms of our uptime and privatizing applications whenever we experience an outage. The SD-WAN feature has been a plus for us. Two-factor authentication has allowed us to add more users in terms of remote working. We have two-factor authentication for remote workers to authenticate them before they get on the network."
"VPN clients are easy to use and deploy."
"Technical support has been good."
"Its most outstanding feature is content filtering."
"The product offers fairly good centralized administration and monitoring with decent capabilities that allow the administrator to have relevent control over devices."
"Meraki MX offers advanced filtration options, plus it behaves like a router and a firewall at the same time."
"The simplicity of configuration is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Ease of management is the best thing about the solution."
"It is easy to manage, which is one of the most important things for us. It is also flexible, stable, and scalable."
"The product is quite secure, easy to manage, and well-connected with other devices."
"I like the automatic firmware updates. We use the Active Directory to authenticate VPN users."
"In general, Meraki MX is easy to work with."
"Meraki makes it easy to be secure and know where the holes are to fix them. We have been fixing anything that we have ever found for 20 years. We keep up-to-date with firmware upgrades. We just try to stay on top of everything for security, like maintaining updates and getting rid of old systems. I feel like we're on top of it."
"The license renewal process, annual renewal price, and the web application firewall features should be improved."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"The web-cache feature which was previously on the FortiGate device, but was deleted with the recent upgrade should be returned. It was a very valuable feature for us."
"We'd like more management across other integrations."
"The solution could be more evenly structured."
"The firmware needs improvement because there are bugs when a new release comes through. Sometimes, the configuration changes, and it's a bit harder to see where the fail is. The first time that you have the firmware, it tends to have some issues, and it's better to wait a bit to update the equipment."
"The process of configuring firewall rules appears excessively complex."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"Pricing is sometimes challenging, although it brings a lot of features."
"It should have excellent integration with the other security tools."
"The reporting from the file or reporting from mobile access needs improvement. The solution, in general, could use better reporting tools."
"Every time we made a change, the policy took about three minutes to apply, and obviously, when there were emergency changes or changes that we needed that were escalated, they were not modified very, very quickly."
"MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients."
"More detail needed for configuration of the VPN."
"The product is quite complex to set up."
"Expensive licensing and firewall stops immediately working if the license is not renewed at expiration date."
"The configuration options for firewall and IPS have limitations."
"In general, the SD-WAN feature needs to be improved. The load sharing and load balancing of the traffic should be improved. I have had some problems with these features in the past."
"You can only have one tunnel in the whole infrastructure — one tunnel with one device."
"The current lead time is longer for Meraki MX, and it needs to be improved."
Earn 20 points
Check Point VPN-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 4 reviews while Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 57 reviews. Check Point VPN-1 [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Meraki MX is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point VPN-1 [EOL] writes "Very good IPS, anti-malware, and VPN 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 VPN-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.
