We performed a comparison between Sonicwall TZ and Sophos XG based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Sophos XG’s single pane of glass makes it easy to manage the entire solution and it can be done anywhere. Users find it very light, stable, and it provides excellent real-time control. Users say SonicWall TZ struggles a bit with load balancing and data filtering, making it a slightly less desirable solution.
"Their interface is very easy to use, it is without bugs."
"It's an easy solution to set up."
"It enables our organization to become more productive. Also, it protects our NEtWare from viruses and malware."
"The most valuable features are the possibility of having one fabric for switching on security."
"The pricing is great and very reasonable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are SD-WAN, filtering testing applications, web filtering, and the new VPN."
"A strong point of FortiGate is the graphical interface is complete and easy to use."
"FortiGate has a strong security topic which allows all of the Fortinet devices to communicate and share information which makes their security more powerful."
"Content filtering and application rules are the most valuable features. It is also easy to configure."
"We are very much happy with the support."
"It's been very easy to implement and deploy."
"SonicWall TZ think it's a good, solid, and stable product."
"With the main firewall routing there, we can do connectivity point-to-point. On the low bandwidth we can connect in all the branches with my corporate office."
"Good site categorization and application controls."
"The network security is great."
"SonicWall TZ is very user-friendly and has network MAC binding. Additionally, the firewall works well."
"The performance is good."
"The most valuable feature, according to the setup we have at our work place here, is the flexibility of the system or the firmware that's running the appliance. It's so flexible, performing multiple rules with different configurations. According to the set up here, we need to implement several firewalls with different access levels, because we have a variety of users. For this requirement, it's very flexible and very easy to use."
"The most valuable features of Sophos XG for our use cases are its firewall capabilities, its ability to connect to wide area and local networks, and its VPN functionality."
"What I have found most valuable with the Sophos XG is it's a key component of the Intercept X EDR environment. You have to have it to receive the full benefit. If you've you are using Sophos SG firewalls, they're great firewalls and in many ways, I prefer them to the Sophos XG. Since I have set them up, programmed them, and manipulate firewall rules, et cetera, the Sophos SG's a better interface. However, the Sophos XG's very powerful. I prefer it over other solutions I have used, such as Cisco Meraki and SupportNet, I don't like them. They're not very friendly to people who have to set them up and implement them."
"Some of the most valuable features are filtering and application control. The DDoS detection also shows traffic jamming and traffic shaping."
"We can configure rules with the user, traffic, etc., making it a very versatile solution for our network."
"What we found valuable is the way they deal with emails, as well as the way the bandwidth usage is shown."
"The solution is scalable."
"The solution's framework needs to be frequently updated in order to have a stable solution."
"The ease of use could be improved."
"Its reporting capabilities can be improved. It should have some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities and some degree of customization. The basic reporting that it currently has is not sufficient to create more usable reports. It needs some sort of out-of-the-box reporting. They try to make customers purchase FortiAnalyzer for this kind of reporting, which is an additional cost. Other firewall vendors, such as SonicWall and Sophos, provide this sort of reporting without any additional cost."
"The support team for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be more customer friendly."
"It is quite new for us, and we need to go more in-depth into the monitoring tools. It provides different features that we need to do what we want. So far, it is okay for us. In terms of improvement, in the future, they can provide a faster implementation of features. Some of the features are first available in other solutions. Fortinet sometimes takes a little bit longer than other solutions, such as Check Point, to implement new features."
"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 should improve high CPU and memory usage that occurs."
"The log analyzer in SonicWall TZ is something that they need to improve upon."
"Although the pricing is good, it could always be lower. If we get to pay less, we're happier."
"I think content filtering is the area this product should improve. It's a little tricky to get put in correctly."
"Sonic Analyzer could be improved. It's difficult to manage and not very intuitive."
"I would like to see lower antivirus pricing."
"They should consider working a bit more on their ransomware application."
"The products' reporting can be improved."
"Its reporting can be improved. Currently, we cannot directly get the user names. It only shows the IP, which makes it a bit confusing because we need to use the IP to find the user. If we could directly get the name of the user, it would be better."
"Sophos XG could improve the connectivity with Microsoft 365 or Azure Active Directory(AD). It doesn't work directly as other solutions do, such as Fortinet FortiGate. The client needs a separate AD server which is a problem."
"The training manual provided to users lacks proper guidance on configuration procedures."
"They should include fiber ports on smaller product models and the tools should be improved for scalability."
"The solution could improve by making the graphical interface better and increasing the performance."
"The interface can bit a bit more user-friendly."
"When I call, I have to wait at least one to two hours to reach them."
"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."
"There are issues with electricity with this solution."
SonicWall TZ is ranked 12th in Firewalls with 78 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews. SonicWall TZ is rated 8.0, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of SonicWall TZ writes "Has efficient user access control feature and good technical support services ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". SonicWall TZ is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, SonicWall NSa, WatchGuard Firebox and Cisco Secure Firewall, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos XGS, Meraki MX and Sophos UTM. See our SonicWall TZ 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.