We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and Sangfor NGAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet FortiGate's ease of management is the most valuable feature."
"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."
"The most valuable features are the policies, filtering, and configuration."
"The IPS is good. It protect my network from attackers."
"The most valuable feature of FortiGate is FortiView which provides proactive monitoring."
"Fortinet FortiGate protects against internet-based threats, both internal and external. It is scalable, stable, easy to use, and easy to install."
"The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"The SD-WAN function is very developed. It has SD-WAN functionality with security features in one device. We can manage from one single console SD-WAN and the security policy."
"Traffic Shaping: The device lets you decide how you want to use your internet services. Due to the fact that Meraki can accept dual WAN, you can decide the way you balance the data traffic."
"To me, the analytics feature is one of the most valuable in Meraki MX. I also find that it has good usability as it's cloud-based. Another valuable feature of Meraki MX is that it's simple to use and it's user-friendly."
"Dual WAN connections are greatly simplified and point-to-point VPNs automatically connect regardless of what WAN connection is active."
"It prevents us from being hacked and delivers information about who and where the attack came from."
"Real Auto VPN with load balancer without needing a public IP. It is simple and functional."
"Very easy to use and navigate."
"The product is quite secure, easy to manage, and well-connected with other devices."
"The features we have found most valuable are the firewall and the monitoring tools."
"The absolute best part of Sangfor NGAF is their support. It's a 24/7 support channel, and the last time I requested their assistance I got a reply within three minutes. They helped solve the problem immediately."
"While the features are not dissimilar to other brands, configuration is much more simple, which works out great for Indonesian people."
"It seems to be a durable, stable product."
"The product is very fast and reliable."
"The built-in features function as intended, providing exceptional value."
"In terms of the most valuable features, the IPS report is quick and updated. Performance is also valuable."
"You might try Sangfor if you are on a tight budget. The price is affordable, and Sangfor offers a lot of features. We don't have any complaints about Sangfor."
"It is a stable solution."
"There is room for improvement related to the logging and reporting aspect."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"They sometimes hide some features and if you want to enable them, you have to go in the CLI, enable the feature and configure it through the CLI. Customers, typically, like everything to be done by the GUI."
"Cisco Meraki products are rising very quickly in the cloud and the connected era. Meraki products offer much better ROI, upgradability, and manageability."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"They are doing good, but they can improve the distributor assignment. The availability of the product and the timeline of delivery are the main things. The distribution should be swift, and the distributor should not reach out to end customers directly. They should work as a distributor. There should also be one more local distributor. Currently, there is only one distributor in Pakistan, and the rest of them are in UAE. It is difficult to work with only one distributor. Sometimes, you don't get along with the same distributor, and that's why they should have one more distributor. Their licensing should also be improved. The activation or renewal of the product should be done from the date of renewal, not from the date on which the license expired."
"As far as wanting more scalability or things in the network diagram, it's going to cost you."
"The support we receive when we need to upgrade is not satisfactory and has room for improvement."
"Direct logging is something that can be introduced. In the absence of cloud management, the possibility of local configurations and on-premise logins becomes restricted. This limitation stands as a primary concern. When it comes to resolving issues, the inability to access login options hampers troubleshooting efforts. The stability is noteworthy; but when compared to alternative products, its stability is comparatively lower. Additionally, certain limitations are observed in terms of remote control. Price-wise, the solution stands out for its competitive and cost-effective nature compared to other alternatives. Operationally, it is user-friendly and requires minimal effort from administrators, making configuration hassle-free."
"The solution's pricing should be reduced."
"Meraki has some hidden features and information that is only privy to their engineers. If that information became available to us, then it would improve our ease of management, and we would be able to make certain adjustments instead of having to go to them."
"Meraki tech support staff have a lot more visibility into your network than you do, which is frustrating at times. I understand the approach is to keep the dashboard easier to understand. This will frustrate more advanced users at times."
"The current lead time is longer for Meraki MX, and it needs to be improved."
"You can only have one tunnel in the whole infrastructure — one tunnel with one device."
"Management can be improved in Meraki MX."
"In the next release, because the security is pretty basic, I think they could include additional security features."
"The interface and user experience are horrible."
"An area for improvement would be the number of ports defined on the box. In the next release, I would like them to develop their provisioning stage of enrolling end devices."
"There is room for improvement in dependency on certain infrastructure, like the DNS dependency on the current DNS server that the company has. It should be standalone. It should not depend on any other DNS server."
"They need to improve their research team and they need to study their data to analyze it and build the product."
"The solution has too many bugs and these slow down the implementation."
"The product must provide more IPS features."
"Our experience with its customer support was quite challenging."
"Sangfor need greater exposer in the market because the market is mainly saturated by Fortinet. The user experience of Fortinet is quite different compared to NGAF. If we want to switch our users from Fortinet to NGAF, we have to convince them that the user experience will be much easier once once they start to use it."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 57 reviews while Sangfor NGAF is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 29 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Sangfor NGAF is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor NGAF writes "Affordable, easy to configure firewall with fast, responsive support". Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Netgate pfSense, whereas Sangfor NGAF is most compared with Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Netgate pfSense, Fortinet FortiOS and Fortinet FortiGate-VM. See our Meraki MX vs. Sangfor NGAF 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.
