We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Radware Alteon based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is very intuitive, easy to deploy, and manage."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"We plan to create packages of services from which it will be possible to build comprehensive tailor-made solutions."
"BIG-IP can do anything. It's like a Swiss Army knife."
"The load balancing function, the monitors that you can create, and iRules programmability are most valuable."
"We like is how they integrate nicely with the Oracle PeopleSoft application."
"BIG-IP LTM is completely stable, and its performance is good."
"Where we are finding the AWS version helpful is when we are trying to scale up new environments. AWS Marketplace helps here a lot."
"Radware has been characterized by being extremely robust. This gives us the confidence to offer our users a continuous service."
"The strength of this solution is the application delivery controller."
"The product offers high availability."
"The best features are the security through the web application firewall, the functionality that the solution offers, being a load balancer with the security functionality on top of it, and the ease of administration."
"The most valuable aspect is the ability to customize the types of load-balancing scenarios needed for customized applications. Some of the load balancers on the market today are strictly out-of-hand load balancers for SSL or HTTP. Radware Alteon is most useful for customizing in-house applications based on ports and protocols."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its stability. During the time that I have been using it, it has not undergone a service failure... And with the integrated application protection, we have not suffered from attacks anymore."
"The GUI was a valuable feature. It was uncomplicated and easy to use."
"I like the web GUI. It's very intuitive and easy to use."
"The analytics should provide insight into latency across various traffic routes and virtual servers."
"F5 BIG-IP LTM can improve on the SSL loading which includes the authentication of certificates. Although, most of these issues have been solved there are still some issue that persists."
"It would possibly help to get more training, even better in local languages."
"There are issues with F5 BIG-IP but they are minor issues not affecting production and services. Sometimes the operations and the facility systems fail. However, there is an alert action from the windows. An ordeal for the manager."
"The user experience for dashboards and reports can be improved. They should make dashboards and the reporting system easier for users. They need to add more reports to the dashboard. Currently, for complicated reports, I have to do the customization. It should have more integration with network firewalls to be able to gather all the information required for traffic management."
"BIG-IP LTM's sandboxing integration could be improved."
"In terms of pricing, it could be more competitive."
"I'm not very sure about the security with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). We have our own private data center, but we are going to migrate our private data center into the Azure cloud environment. Security will then be a major concern when we migrate our own whole infrastructure to the public cloud."
"We recently had a problem with the tables Obsolete ARP which was observed by the support team. It would be good to diagnose and solve this problem with a patch since it is not documented that it will be solved in later updates."
"I would like for the load balancing to work with premier and the cloud, a mix of premium and cloud."
"I would like to see the loading documentation improved."
"Recently our team was talking about the things you can customize in Alteon and the level of programming that doing so demands. I would like to see more information on how to customize the programming and troubleshoot."
"Performance could be improved."
"I would like the solution to display and help visualize the reference map more easily. I would also like to better understand where queries come from and know which users are consulting the application, along with which app."
"Radware Alteon could improve the troubleshooting from the command line interface, they could do a better job making it easier."
"The reverse proxy piece is a little bit complicated. If the reverse proxy were easier to implement, that would help."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 7th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 33 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Radware Alteon is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "It's a good fit for a small team because the maintenance is easier and you don't need to know how to code". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and Kemp LoadMaster, whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, A10 Networks Thunder ADC, HAProxy and Fortinet FortiWeb. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Radware Alteon report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.
Apart from throughout consideration. Radware license charges based on throughput and F5 charges based on features only. For example, if you buy F5 with an appliance throughput of 10g that throughput available on day one, but if it's Radware, you will get a 1gbps license and hardware has 10gbps throughput. You can only use 1gbps on day one. On the load balancing side, both are equal only I rule is the game-changer. A lot of customization is possible with irule.
For ADC both are very good, But in the leader in Gartner of ADC products, the tops rivals are Citrix ADC and F5
They are very good and can do the job but only some major differences to consider are.
Citrix ADC - Has App Expert Wizard which is a GUI ready to use to build simple to complex traffic syntax rule easily. Any admin that has some good background sees this syntax can understand and configure, it is very easy. This is good for a big complex environment or in case your network admin leaves the job and new one comes to take the role.
GUI; Travesing each menu is very easy as they are all in the same pattern with every feature.
F5 - Use the iRule, which does the same job. If you like to write programming code with lots of { { } }, etc, it's ok. But for many admin teams, it may be hard to troubleshoot the traffics rules if the guy who wrote the rule left, not that hard to learn but still harder than GUI.
GUI- F5 GUI is sometimes too complex than needed, sometimes it's left, right, under have to drill down a lot just to get to the simple tasks.
Overall there are both good.