Compare Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls vs. Sophos XG
Sponsored
 | Anonymous User President at a tech vendor |
| Anonymous User Server Administrator and Operation Manager at a computer software company |
| Hermann Potgieter Senior Network Architect at Virtua Technologies |
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls vs. Sophos XG and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
464,369 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:
"The IPS (In-plane switching) is the most valuable feature."
"I like the user interface because the navigation is very easy, straightforward on your left side pane you have all the sites that you need to browse. Unlike any other firewalls, it's pretty straightforward."
"We have multiple secure internal networks linked with our plants. We are from a oil company, so we have multiple plant areas which need to have restricted network access. Therefore, we are using it for restricting access to the plant area."
"The initial setup was completely straightforward."
"I would say the Firepower module is most valuable. I'm trying more to transition to this kind firewall. I had to study a little on Palo Alto Networks equipment. There is a lot I have to learn about the difference."
"The feature that I found most valuable is the overall stability of the product."
"The stability of Cisco ASA is excellent compared to other products on the market. Because of our customer experience as an integrator company, our clients never report any performance problems. We have a good performance reputation with Cisco ASA."
"Right now, Cisco ASA NGFW has given us a lot of improvement. We are planning to move to a new facility and will be a much larger organization."
"We standardized on the product and got rid of several other types of firewalls from different vendors."
"It is very scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to deeply analyze the connection or connection type."
"One of the things I really like about it is that we have the same features and functions available on the entry-level device (PA-220), as do large corporations with much more costly appliances."
"One of the best firewalls on the market."
"Good functionality and features."
"The basic configuration will only take 15 minutes to set up"
"The solution is very stable."
"We have found that the simplicity of the XG 210 is its most valuable feature."
"Sophos XG has cybersecurity. It integrates with the antivirus software."
"It gives me a very good, stable connection in all tunnels."
"The SL VPNs are the most valuable feature. I have a lot of systems out of the head office that need to connect to the local networks, and they all connect wirelessly via the Sophos VPN client."
"What I like about his program, is that it is easy to use and easy to manage."
"The filtering is very easy to do. You can segment and create profiles for usage very easily."
"The solution seems pretty stable. We've had no issues so far."
"I like the fact that it can self remove malware and do updates on the cloud via Sophos Central."
Cons
"At times the product is sluggish and slow"
"If I need to download AnyConnect in a rush, it will prompt me for my Cisco login account. Nobody wants to download a client to a firewall that they don't own."
"Most of the time, when I try to run Java, it is not compatible with ASA's current operating systems."
"We have to rely on Cisco ASDM to access the firewall interface. This needs improvement. Because we have a web-based interface, and it is a lot more user-friendly."
"The installation and integration of Cisco ASA with FirePOWER can be improved. The management with Fortigate is easier than Cisco ASA on FirePOWER. The management side of Cisco ASA can be improved so it can be more easily configured and used."
"One of my main concerns, an area that could use improvement is in adjusting the need to buy a license to enable features."
"Usually, the customers are satisfied, but I am going to recommend that all clients upgrade to FirePOWER management. I want Cisco to improve the feature called anti-spam. We use a Cisco only email solution, that's why we need the anti-spam on email facility."
"There is no support here in Georgia. If something goes wrong, support is not always very helpful with the other firewalls or other products."
"I would like integration with Evident.io and RedLock."
"The data loss prevention (DLP) capabilities need to be beefed up."
"Overall it is good. It is reliable and easy to understand. However, the monitoring feature could be improved."
"The initial configuration is complicated to set up."
"The user interface is a bit clumsy and not very user-friendly."
"Could also use better customer support."
"Customers don't want to buy extra things for extra capabilities"
"Generating reports is not so easy."
"When I call, I have to wait at least one to two hours to reach them."
"The only issue that Sophos XG now needs to improve is the product's reporting capability."
"I would like to have remote access to clients using a static IP for a certain period of time."
"The initial set up process can be a little tricky, especially when you are registering with Sophos using your registration number. Setup is not necessarily complex, but it's not trouble-free. You do have connectivity issues at the initial setup with registering the device on the Sophos platform to access the advanced features. It doesn't always go through the first time around. That may be an issue with the quality of our automation. I'm not sure exactly what it is."
"The program is rather expensive."
"The UTM itself needs improvement. When you're navigating it seems like it takes forever to load anything. The hardware is okay. It's just the software that could be more responsive."
"It's easy to use, but it's hard to configure exact settings. They need to make it easier to access advanced features."
"On reports, they sometimes give a summary, but it lists different users as unknown. There are times that I really want to know which user or which IP is causing a problem."
"Licensing is expensive compared to other solutions."
"The cost is a big factor for us. This is why we are using it only in our restricted area. They are very much higher than their competitors in the market."
"We paid about $7,000 for the Cisco firewall, plus another small Cisco router and the lead switch. It was under the combined license. It's a final agreement."
"Watch out for hidden licensing and incredibly high annual maintenance costs."
"I bought a license for three years and it was really affordable."
"With AnyConnect, it depends on your license. It depends on the number of concurrent users you want to connect."
"This solution might be expensive, but it is economical in the long run."
"Some of our customers would be more likely to standardize on Cisco equipment if the cost was lower because a lot of people install cheap equipment."
"Annually, the licensing costs are too much."
"Pricing is yearly, but it depends. You could pay on a yearly basis, or every three years. If you want to add a device or two, there would be an additional cost. Also, if you want to do an assessment, or other similar add-on, you have to pay accordingly for the additional service."
"It will be worth your time to hire a contractor to set it up and configure it for you, especially if you are not very knowledgeable with PA firewalls."
"Don't buy a device with more power than you really need, because licensing depends on the cost of the box you have."
"The licensing is annual, and there aren't any additional fees on top of that."
"The price of this product should be reduced."
"The pricing is competitive in the market."
"This is an expensive product, which is why some of our customers don't adopt it."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice »
"For licensing the XG 210, we paid approximately $3000 for three years. There are no additional fees on top of this."
"It's a suitable price and license."
"We are paying about $1,500 yearly for the Enterprise Plus. As far as I know, there aren't costs above this standard fee."
"The Sophos pricing, in general, is better than SonicWall, Fortinet, WatchGuard, or anybody else."
"We paid for our licensing for three years, upfront, and there are no costs in addition to the standard fees."
"The price is cheaper than that of some competing vendors."
"The pricing is flexible. Sophos looks at a country's economy and offers flexible pricing. This is how they have managed to penetrate the market."
"It's approximately $6,000 for each device."
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
464,369 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Answer:
When you compare these
firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages,
practices and… more »
Top Answer: They provide DDoS protection and multi-factor authentication. That is a good option as it enables work-from-home… more »
Top Answer: In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco.
Top Answer: Pricewise Cisco. But PA has better rating.
Top Answer: Ease of Use
- GUI familiarities and adoption level can differ from user to user.
- Personally I found CISCO ASA… more »
Top Answer: The simplicity of the setup is the most valuable feature.
Top Answer: The BGP engine is very limited.
Top Answer: If you pay for the premium support, you'll get better support from Sophos. I would rate Sophos XG an eight out of ten… more »
Compared 34% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Compared 21% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv
Palo Alto NGFW, Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall, Palo Alto Networks PA-Series
Cisco ASA firewalls deliver enterprise-class firewall functionality with highly scalable and flexible VPN capabilities to meet diverse needs, from small/branch offices to high performance data centers and service providers. Available in a wide range of models, Cisco ASA can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Flexible VPN capabilities include support for remote access, site-to-site, and clientless VPN. Also, select appliances support clustering for increased performance, VPN load balancing to optimize available resources, advanced high availability configurations, and more.
Cisco ASAv is the virtualized version of the Cisco ASA firewall. Widely deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco ASAv is ideal for remote worker and multi-tenant environments. The solution scales up/down to meet performance requirements and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco ASAv can deliver micro-segmentation to protect east-west network traffic.
Cisco firewalls provide consistent security policies, enforcement, and protection across all your environments. Unified management for Cisco ASA and FTD/NGFW physical and virtual firewalls is delivered by Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO), with cloud logging also available. And with Cisco SecureX included with every Cisco firewall, you gain a cloud-native platform experience that enables greater simplicity, visibility, and efficiency.
Learn more about Cisco’s firewall solutions, including virtual appliances for public and private cloud.
Palo Alto Networks' next-generation firewalls secure your business with a prevention-focused architecture and integrated innovations that are easy to deploy and use. Now, you can accelerate growth and eliminate risks at the same time.
Sophos XG Firewall is next gen firewall that is optimized for today’s business, delivering all the protection and insights you need in a single, powerful appliance that’s easy to manage.
Learn more about Cisco ASA Firewall
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls
Learn more about Sophos XG
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.
SkiStar AB, Ada County, Global IT Services PSF, Southern Cross Hospitals, Verge Health, University of Portsmouth, Austrian Airlines, The Heinz Endowments
Information Not Available
Financial Services Firm17%
Comms Service Provider14%
Manufacturing Company10%
Computer Software Company7%
Comms Service Provider35%
Computer Software Company22%
Government4%
Media Company4%
Computer Software Company23%
Comms Service Provider23%
Financial Services Firm14%
Manufacturing Company9%
Comms Service Provider27%
Computer Software Company24%
Media Company5%
Energy/Utilities Company5%
Financial Services Firm15%
Healthcare Company15%
Comms Service Provider12%
Manufacturing Company10%
Comms Service Provider41%
Computer Software Company19%
Media Company5%
Government4%
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise26%
Large Enterprise39%
Small Business27%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise52%
Small Business41%
Midsize Enterprise32%
Large Enterprise27%
Small Business56%
Midsize Enterprise30%
Large Enterprise14%
Small Business48%
Midsize Enterprise28%
Large Enterprise24%
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls vs. Sophos XG and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
464,369 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 50 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 56 reviews. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6, while Sophos XG is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "The product stability and level of security are second to none in the industry". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Offers a high level of visibility of what's happening on your network or on your client machines". Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Azure Firewall, pfSense, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, pfSense, Sophos UTM, WatchGuard Firebox and OPNsense. See our Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls vs. Sophos XG 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.