We compared Sophos XG and Sophos XGS based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
These include the need for more intuitive user-friendliness, clearer interface, enhanced stability, and improved alert management. Users suggested improvements such as easier navigation, better display of options, and more efficient alert handling. Some users also reported occasional performance issues and system crashes, indicating areas that can be refined for a more reliable user experience.
Features: Sophos XG is known for its advanced threat protection capabilities, seamless integration with security tools, and exceptional technical support, while Sophos XGS focuses on robust security measures, comprehensive network visibility, and efficient performance.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Sophos XG product varies depending on user feedback. Customers have emphasized the overall cost of implementation, the initial investment required, and the licensing arrangements. On the other hand, feedback on Sophos XGS suggests that some users find the product competitively priced and of good value, but there are concerns about significant setup costs and complexities in licensing. Experiences with setup costs differ among users for both products., The Sophos XG product offers positive ROI with its effective protection and simplified network management. On the other hand, Sophos XGS provides a significant increase in ROI by improving security infrastructure and streamlining security operations.
Room for Improvement: Sophos XG has room for improvement in user-friendliness, interface clarity, and stability. Users desire more intuitive navigation, clearer options, and improved alert handling. Performance issues and system crashes are also a concern. Meanwhile, there are areas of opportunity for improvement in Sophos XGS according to user feedback.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews for Sophos XG and Sophos XGS show that the duration required for deployment, setup, and implementation phases varies among users. Some users reported longer deployment duration for XG compared to XGS, while others mentioned similar timeframes for both products. Context is important in understanding the differences., Users have reported positive experiences with the customer service and support provided by both Sophos XG and Sophos XGS. They appreciate the expertise, prompt responsiveness, and willingness to address concerns shown by both teams.
The summary above is based on 79 interviews we conducted recently with Sophos XG and Sophos XGS users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The most useful functionality of Fortinet FortiGate is the user interface, multiple engines, and their cloud with the latest integrations. Additionally, the Security Fabric tool is very good."
"The most important feature, normally for small business customers, is link load balancing."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is the simple configuration."
"Our security improved from being able to put in rules and close off unwanted traffic."
"UTM/NGFW features and FortiCloud for logs and backups are awesome."
"The user interface is relatively easy. The devices are easy to deploy and figure out when you have experience with other security appliances."
"It is user friendly, and has all the features you need."
"With FortiClient, you can easily connect when you are home, check out what you want to do, and connect to your network when you are not at work. You can switch on servers and you can check what is wrong."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos XG is the VBM."
"As a security solution, it's a very good security solution."
"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."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the user management system."
"I like the dashboard, the interface, the management console, and the remote login."
"Technical support is responsive."
"We get good usage out of the features. It has enabled us to gain popularity. It has great features."
"The initial setup is pretty simple."
"Sophos XGS that's a good firewall. If you use the endpoint, then you have what Sophos calls synchronized security. That will mean that if one of the endpoints is affected, it will be automatically set in isolation."
"It's easy to use and user-friendly."
"It offers an easy initial implementation."
"It is very stable. I have not heard of any issue where clients would have to replace hardware. It's been really stable for a long while."
"We are happy and satisfied with all the features."
"The solution is scalable."
"The solution is easy to use and configure, once you know how to apply the policies."
"It is scalable."
"I would like to see more advanced developments of a wireless controller in the future."
"In terms of what could be improved, the SD-WAN is quite difficult, because if you install the new box, 15 is okay, but if you change from an old configuration, if there is already configuration and a policy when you change to SD-WAN, you must change the whole policy that you see in the interface."
"The stability of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"To some degree, it's almost a question as to why some of this stuff isn't simpler. For example, for an AP deployment, while it's integrated, the number of steps that you have to go through in order to get the AP up, seems like a lot."
"One area for improvement is the performance on the bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"Fortinet Fortigate could benefit by simplifying some of their processes."
"Some of the software stability could improve."
"With FortiGate, the main complaint that I have heard is about the technical support."
"The program is rather expensive."
"Sophos XG could improve by being more stable and for it to be able to be used for large enterprises."
"There could be some room for improvement in its pricing since my clients usually feel like the product is on the expensive side."
"Sophos needs improvements made to the console, such as host entry or defining rules directly from it."
"It is complicated to get the reports if you are not experienced with Sophos."
"I would like to next release to be able to support on-premise deployment. The construction of the rules within the firewall could also use some improvement."
"The logging side of it could definitely be better. Some of the logging lacks, and the information that they provide you, especially in the spam filtering section, could be better."
"The UI needs improvement because it can be a little weird at times."
"The support team are helpful when you eventually get hold of them which takes a long time. They can improve how quickly you get technical support."
"The first time a person sets it up, they will need training."
"The SD-WAN feature isn't very good. It's there, but it doesn't work properly."
"It would be nice to have features like the network access control (NAC) that Cisco has for Identity Services Engine. In the next release, I would also like to see an increase in the performance of the processing units."
"Sophos XGS's response to zero-day attacks could be improved."
"The configurations can be a bit complex."
"Level one technical support is not good at all and needs to be improved."
"The customer service response time can be improved."
Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews while Sophos XGS is ranked 17th in Firewalls with 58 reviews. Sophos XG is rated 8.2, while Sophos XGS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XGS writes "Easy to use, simple to learn, and offers great reporting". Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, SonicWall TZ, Meraki MX and Sophos UTM, whereas Sophos XGS is most compared with OPNsense, Netgate pfSense, WatchGuard Firebox, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Meraki MX. See our Sophos XG vs. Sophos XGS 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.