We performed a comparison between Sophos UTM and Sophos XG 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."The signature database and zero-day detection are Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"The network security and cloud security are most valuable."
"The most important features of Fortinet FortiGate are the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) and firewall control applications."
"Centralized monitoring, policy management, and virtualized appliances allow us to take control over our public and private infrastructure."
"I think that the UTM features are the most value, as it truly protects my infrastructure."
"The IPS is good. It protect my network from attackers."
"The technical support is great."
"Sophos UTM is the simplest of these products to setup."
"The intrusion prevention is great, and I like dual virus scanning on the network layer because we scan it through Avira and Sophos. Web filtering is also a fantastic option for clients who want to really lock down internet access."
"It helped to connect our satellite offices to the main Amazon infrastructure in a circular way."
"Stability-wise, I rate this solution a ten out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate this solution a ten out of ten."
"We use Sophos UTM as our main firewall with all its features included. Mainly, it controls all of our network perimeter security: firewall, IDS/IPS, and web application firewall (including VoIP)."
"Monitoring and reporting are areas that need improvement."
"The product is extremely intuitive."
"The implementation with the AWS environment was good."
"The most valuable features of Sophos XG are the ease of management and good out-of-the-box reporting."
"Sophos XG's price is right, and it's easy to manage. It's a good fit for our current needs at the moment."
"I like the fact that it can self remove malware and do updates on the cloud via Sophos Central."
"Technical support is responsive."
"The solution's most valuable feature stems from its ability to protect our organization's web servers."
"It has a very friendly interface like the Cyberoam iNG units, it has customizable policies, it has proper templates that you can even modify, and you can customize the rules, down to each single user."
"The solution is easy to set up and configure."
"I like the dashboard, the interface, the management console, and the remote login."
"They can do more tests before they release new versions because I would like to be more assured. We had some experiences where they release something new and great, but some of the old features are disabled or they don't work well, which impacts the product satisfaction. The manufacturer should be able to prove that everything works or not only that it might work. This is applicable to most of the other services, software, and hardware companies. They all should work on this. We cannot trust every new release, such as a beta release, on the first day. We wait for some comments on the forums and from other companies that we know. We always wait a few weeks before we use the updated version. They should also extend the VPN client application, especially for Linux versions. Currently, it has an application for Linux devices, but it doesn't work the way we want to connect to the VPN. They use only the old connection, not the new one. They have VPN client applications for Windows and Mac, but they can add more useful features to better manage the devices and monitor the current health of each device. Such features would be helpful for our company."
"Bandwidth usage in reporting could be improved for Fortinet FortiGate."
"Fortinet FortiGate should improve the VPN tokens."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having better visibility. Palo Alto has better visibility."
"The central management for the FortiGate Fortinet Firewall needs improvement. They have the manager to do the essential management for both SD-WAN and for the security policy. They should also improve the SD-WAN function."
"The cloud features and integration could be improved."
"I would like to see more advanced developments of a wireless controller in the future."
"Its reporting and pricing need improvement."
"The support could be better."
"The solution is not scalable."
"The solution needs to do better at covering mobile devices, although they may have an integrated solution for that purpose."
"Sophos UTM's internet security could be better."
"Doesn't provide antivirus for individual computers."
"There is still room for improvement in wireless protection. I don't mean their WiFi device is bad, but there are still things to improve on, such as WiFi roaming."
"They could reduce the price."
"The lack of import/export functions for network and service options drives me mad."
"SD-WAN can be improved."
"Sophos XG's web server protection and log viewer could improve. They should also introduce sandboxing."
"The support service level agreement in regard to the amount of time needed to upgrade things is too low. It should be higher."
"Everything is working as expected at this moment, but the anti-spam solution in Sophos XG needs to be improved. It needs more granular features and more stability. The anti-spam solution currently doesn't have many features, and we would like to have more features. At this moment, there is no expression filter for anti-spam. We need something to be able to filter subjects or attachments in emails based on the keyword. Sometimes, there is an issue with anti-spam, and Sophos XG suddenly stops processing incoming or outgoing emails. The only solution for this issue is to restart the appliance. Their support should be improved. It takes a long time to escalate a support case from level one to level two."
"Sophos XG could improve Data Loss Prevention(DLP)."
"The reporting could be improved in this solution by adding more details."
"The user interface could be improved and more bandwidth management would be helpful."
"The security of Sophos XG could be improved."
Sophos UTM is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 110 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews. Sophos UTM is rated 8.4, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Sophos UTM writes "It's a highly stable platform with very few hardware issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". Sophos UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall and Untangle NG Firewall, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos XGS, SonicWall TZ and WatchGuard Firebox. See our Sophos UTM 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.
The biggest difference between Sophos SG and Sophos XG is performance.
Now, there's even a newer Hardware Platform (same OS as Sophos XG, which is called SFOS) - the Sophos XGS which has different chipset architecture, to attend each security module, with its newest feature called XStream Technology.
Besides that, the GUI is very different. Nevertheless, it's worth trying the Sophos XG or XGS, since its GUI is getting overhauled for better performance and easier management, by each new release.
Sophos UTM is no longer being developed, according to our reseller. All the development effort is going into XG. So XG will be the only Sophos firewall going forward, UTM will eventually be end of life.
Hi,
The new appliances XGS have a dedicated streaming CPU (Xstream), in addition to the main CPU.
I have personally tested the differences between the XG and XGS similar appliances. The result is spectacular. 30% more perf minimum:
https://www.sophos.com/en-us/p...
The UTM-9 is soon end-life. Sophos security staff is now focused on SFOS 18, XG, XGS.
To respond to the question "the biggest difference", I think is the "Synchronized Security":
https://www.sophos.com/en-us/l...
The firewall is one of the full security solutions centralized in Sophos Central:
https://www.sophos.com/en-us/p...
At most of our customers, we implement a Sophos Endpoint locally on servers and workstations and firewall XGS. The synchronized security interact between firewall and endpoints. This can resolve the problem with the "lateral movement" of an infected computer. It can isolate a computer from the network when detected as infected:
https://news.sophos.com/en-us/...
It can be extended to secure cloud systems with Sophos ClouOptix:
https://www.sophos.com/en-us/p...
Tested with VM in AWS and Azure, work 5*!
Another big difference is the Webserver Application Firewall. All my customers with an internal webserver to be published in the net are protected with this "reverse proxy" (WAF). It really does the job of protecting IIS, Apache, etc. from externals attacks.
Another trick is the SSL VPN sites to sites. When a branch office is implemented with a front ISP router, sometimes the NAT traversal is not possible, for IPSEC VPN connections (UDP 500). With this SSL VPN, Simple NAT works and gives an SSL 128-bit AES encryption.
Finally, I have a lot of experience in implementing UTM and, now, XG(S). No way, the log is a big difference, easier to use as in Fortigates! It is similar to CheckPoint firewalls.
For my experience, no way: -> Sophos XG(S)
Here is an interesting link on differences between UTM and XG:
https://www.avanet.com/en/blog...
Regards,
A.Rastello
My understanding is that UTM is the software; SG is the hardware. You can buy Sophos UTM running on SG hardware and then later upgrade to the XG running on the same hardware.
I've been told by our Sophos reseller that Sophos are pushing the XG as next generation firewall, and developing it to at least as good as UTM. So XG will be the firewall of choice moving forward. UTM will not be developed further, according to him.
To my understanding, UTM and XG are from different legacy companies that
are now owned my Sophos. During my time researching anti-virus, UTM makes
more sense for our needs seeing as XG is primarily a firewall. From the
information I was able to find during the time of research, it seemed most
of the community felt XG had feature gaps from UTM.
UTM specifically SG series is a very mature and stable platform. It lacks some of the new features of XG; however has a very strong feature set. If you are looking for stability, ease of use and something well documented and understood than I suggest going this way. If however you are looking for a strong level of integration and have a greater than 3 year horizon then I suggest XG.
Wifi integration for example works better on the new platform.
There are several differences since there are 2 versions,
XG firewall has integrations with other products like intercept X and admin from Sophos central.
SG UTM has less integration since it's a separate product. It was formerly Astaro firewall, but the most advanced features have been only set to the XG.
There are appliance and software versions of both products. Depending on your need you might choose one or another. But basically, look at them as 2 different firewalls.