We performed a comparison between Check Point IPS and Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Protection in real-time is very good. It helps us detect things on time and make decisions to improve perimeter security."
"The autonomous threat prevention is very easy to use. The APIs and SmartConsole tool also work well."
"Check Point IPS manages risk categories very well and accordingly helps us protect each of our devices in real-time."
"The integration is a valuable feature."
"This is a very stable product."
"The reports are well written so that you can understand what type of attack has occurred, the originating IP address, and other details."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point IPS is the management of devices and policies."
"User-friendly and easy to implement."
"For those who want a next-gen firewall that's easy to configure and easy to operate, I think you should go for Palo Alto."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Threat Prevention for our company is the next generation firewall."
"The user interface is a bit more professional than some free products."
"It's a monster, it's got so many beautiful features. We do deal with other firewalls and we've got a better idea of what other firewalls' capabilities are, any comparison with the Palo Alto I liked the quality of service on the applications that you can control the amount of bandwidth an application is allowed to consume. The best feature is the quality of the application quality of service."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is the market leader as far as security gateways and endpoint protection. Additionally, the threat database that is used is one of the best."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It's quite easy. Deployment took one to two weeks."
"With the IP address flag, I was able to see that I was being hacked. The moment there was an interaction between somebody on my network and that IP, the solution was able to flag it, and we were able to protect ourselves."
"You can scale the product."
"When entering, it always takes a long time to load."
"Threat Prevention policies are not very easily manageable as there are several profiles/policies/etc. Therefore, there are several ways to add exceptions and check the configuration."
"I hear from my admin that the firmware upgrade process is quite cumbersome."
"There is no standalone IPS appliance available."
"In my opinion, the Check Point software engineers should works on the performance of the blade - when it is activated with the big number of the protections in place, the monitoring shows us the significant increase in the CPU utilization for the gateway appliances - up to 30 percents, even so we are cherry-picking only the profiles that we really needed."
"I am not aware of a preview channel or some repository to have a preview on upcoming signatures, however, this would be nice to have."
"Having additional reports available would be helpful."
"The price has room for improvement."
"The application’s pricing and dashboard need improvement. It could be user-friendly."
"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower. In comparison with other solutions, I believe they're quite competitive."
"It's not so easy to set up a test environment, because it's not so easy to get the test license. The vendor only gives you 90 days for a test license; it's a tough license to get."
"The documentation needs to be improved. I need better information about how to configure it and what the best practices are."
"The solution needs to improve its local technical support services. There is no premium support offered in our market."
"The technology firewall anomaly network could stand improvement."
"The price of licenses should be lowered to make it less costly to scale our solution."
"Mission learning techniques should continue to expand and detect unknown threats on the fly."
More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point IPS is ranked 3rd in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 46 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is ranked 7th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 24 reviews. Check Point IPS is rated 8.6, while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Check Point IPS writes "Great for detection and access with the capabilities of defining specific rules". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention writes "A good amount of granularity and advanced URL filtering capabilities". Check Point IPS is most compared with Darktrace, Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, Cisco NGIPS and Fortinet FortiGate IPS, whereas Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Arista NDR, Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System, Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Darktrace. See our Check Point IPS vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) 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.