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."We are a visual effects company, and there have been a number of high profile security issues in our industry. This has brought us to a higher standard of security, which our clients are very keen on these days."
"The product is easy to use and is stable. The SV1 functionality is a benefit."
"Their interface is very easy to use, it is without bugs."
"Security management tool that's easy to integrate and easy to work with. No issues found with its stability and scalability."
"It does a lot for you for intrusion protection and as an antivirus. The threat management bundle is worth the money. You don't need another company to monitor your web traffic for you. You can do everything yourself on the firewall. You restrict your own black list for people on the firewall. You don't need to pay some other company for another product to do that for you. The firewall can do that for you. So, it's an easy-to-use product for people to be independent. They don't need to rely on other vendors to do what the firewall can do. They can do everything."
"The most important features with FortiGate are the web filter and application controls. We can control our internet usage and use the web filter for application purposes."
"It blocks the vulnerabilities that can negatively impact us."
"The product offers very good security."
"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."
"VPN clients are easy to use and deploy."
"Technical support has been good."
"It's flexible, easy to configure, and easy to manage."
"Its ease of configuration and management is very useful for us and for other companies that don't have an onsite IT person. It is easy to configure and easy to manage. It is easy to configure the VPN with the Auto VPN feature."
"I like the automatic firmware updates. We use the Active Directory to authenticate VPN users."
"The initial setup for me was straightforward."
"The solution is good for load balancing."
"I am happy with the technical support for the solution. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."
"Easy to deploy with a simple configuration."
"Point-to-point VPNs can dynamically follow IP changes with no need for static IPs."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"A couple of things I've seen that need improvement, especially in terms of a hard coding. The driver-level active moment really is out-of-the-box and we have to have contact the customer support and sometimes it is difficult to resolve."
"They need faster serviceability and more security features."
"The inability to scale the FortiAnalyzer to match our growth necessitates the purchase of new hardware."
"One of the problems I was having was with user mapping, and it is an issue for which I have escalated tickets with Fortinet support."
"One area for improvement is the performance on the bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"MTBF: Hardware failure is more common when compared to SonicWall or Cisco ASA."
"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."
"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."
"Pricing is sometimes challenging, although it brings a lot of features."
"What I would like to see in the next version is to have more interfaces for WAN links."
"The product is quite complex to set up."
"The client-side VPN is weak. The product could be improved with deployment templates."
"The current lead time is longer for Meraki MX, and it needs to be improved."
"An area for improvement in Meraki MX is that it needs some provision, as supplying the unit through Cisco can be tedious at times, but as far as the product itself and its offerings, Meraki MX is five-star all the way."
"You can only have one tunnel in the whole infrastructure — one tunnel with one device."
"The security is not as strong as it could be"
"FortiGate is cheaper than Meraki. Even the license renewal is less than Meraki."
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.
