We performed a comparison between Check Point NGFW and pfSense based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The main difference between these two products is that Check Point users feel that the tool’s VPN is hard to integrate. In addition, Check Point does not have an open-source version like pfSense does.
"Whenever I need something, Fortinet improves and updates the software for me."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"The signature database and zero-day detection are Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features."
"The pipe filter application is an outstanding feature."
"Anti-Spam web content filterinG."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is highly scalable because they have devices that can handle a large amount of traffic."
"Some of the key features of the solution is that it has good reporting, you can receive many details from the connection, for example, clients and website information."
"It is easy to use, and its management is the best. Check Point has a great unified management solution for firewalls and security products."
"It excels in malware prevention, utilizing features like fan black pattern and vulnerability-driven detection, ensuring comprehensive security against evolving threats."
"I like the Next-Generation Firewall."
"Its usability is the best for me. As compared to Palo Alto, Juniper, or Cisco firewalls, Check Point firewall has the best user interface for management, reading logs, looking for some objects, and looking for policies."
"The product offers a robust and intuitive experience, catering to the essential needs of users."
"The firewall rule writing and object creation are the best and simplest I've seen on a firewall."
"While not being cheap, their pricing models are competitive."
"Check Point has given us the ability to comply with regulations and with capacities in a way that we never could before."
"The solution is fairly scalable when it comes to integrating with other applications and data sets."
"The initial setup was simple and fast."
"The solution is very easy to use and configure."
"I'm the expert when it comes to Linux systems, however, with the pfSense, due to the web interface, the rest of the staff can actually make changes to it as required without me worrying about whether they've opened up ports incorrectly or not. The ease of use for non-expert staff is very good."
"It is easy to use and has integrity with other systems, such as proxies and quality of service."
"The solution is very easy to use and has a very nice GUI."
"The initial setup was straightforward, therefore I wanted to continue using the product."
"Open source and support are valuable. I have community support."
"Fortinet needs more memory to save the log files. We need it to save the logs on the hardware and not in the cloud. I know this feature is available in FortiCloud, but if we need this log locally, it is not available."
"I'm not sure if it's something that they already have or are developing something, however, we need some dedicated features for container security."
"They are doing good, but they can improve the distributor assignment. The availability of the product and the timeline of delivery are the main things. The distribution should be swift, and the distributor should not reach out to end customers directly. They should work as a distributor. There should also be one more local distributor. Currently, there is only one distributor in Pakistan, and the rest of them are in UAE. It is difficult to work with only one distributor. Sometimes, you don't get along with the same distributor, and that's why they should have one more distributor. Their licensing should also be improved. The activation or renewal of the product should be done from the date of renewal, not from the date on which the license expired."
"Palo Alto has a feature called WildFire Analysis that is unavailable in FortiGate. WildFire is better than a sandbox because it can address zero-day threats and vulnerabilities. It can immediately identify zero-day threats from the cloud."
"The UI could be improved."
"For the migration, everyone has a firewall in use and I am selling Fortinet. Typically, I am replacing another firewall. Previously, there was a tool available to convert configurations from one firewall, such as Palo Alto, to Fortinet, but this tool is no longer free. If it could be made free again, it would be very beneficial."
"The support costs and licensing are sometimes so expensive."
"Technical support is good but the response time could be faster."
"No product is perfect and there is always room for improvement."
"One thing to improve is the VSX gateway. It is quite complex to work with VSX and they are quite easy to break if you aren't familiar with them."
"While the solution is good, we wish to have something that is a bit better, as the threats have evolved over time."
"The interface could be better."
"For the next release, we would like to have better ruleset cleanup tools that are already included."
"I would like for them to develop the ability to manage a cloud firewall with the same console. That would be very helpful."
"Without any training, it is very hard to administrate the whole Check Point NGFW."
"Some features, like the VPN, antispam, data loss prevention, etc., are managed in an external console. In the future, I'd like all features in the same console, in one place, where we can see and configure all features."
"I've never tried it in large environments. All my clients are small businesses with a handful of employees, so I am not sure how it works in large environments. I keep up with recent versions, and there's nothing I'm waiting for, and nothing breaks when I get a new version."
"I would like to see pfSense integrate WireGuard. Currently, pfSense uses OpenVPN, and there's nothing wrong with it, but WireGuard is a lot leaner and meaner."
"The hotspot and the portal feature in this solution are not stable for WiFi access. We use it at least once or twice every day and it crashes. Some modules can be better by improving detection and having new updates. Additionally, we have some issues with clustering and load balancing that could improve."
"One concern I have with Netgate pfSense is related to packet filtering. Specifically, issues can arise with certain functionalities like GP, and, at times, there may be bugs."
"The product must provide integration with other solutions."
"Lacks instructional videos."
"Network monitoring and device inventory could use some improvements. I'm using SpiceWorks for this because it never really worked in pfSense."
"Adjustment in the interfaces: I had to adjust those interfaces manually and of course that is a great feature that you can restore it but it is immediately also one point for improvement. If you don't have to adjust, if it's just stamped and it works, that's great."
Check Point NGFW is ranked 5th in Firewalls with 279 reviews while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. Check Point NGFW is rated 8.8, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Check Point NGFW writes "Good antivirus protection and URL filtering with very good user identification capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". Check Point NGFW is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Azure Firewall and OPNsense, whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, KerioControl, Sophos UTM and Zyxel Unified Security Gateway. See our Check Point NGFW vs. Netgate pfSense 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.
