We performed a comparison between Check Point NGFW and SonicWall TZ based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point NGFW is highly regarded for its extensive security features, centralized management, and virtualization capabilities. SonicWall TZ distinguishes itself with its unified threat management, VPN capabilities, web security, and intuitive interface.
Check Point NGFW needs improvements in integration with other infrastructures, hardware upgrades, cost and pricing perspective, stability and security, setup process, load balancing capabilities, technical support, and reporting capabilities. SonicWall TZ requires improvements in rated throughput, secondary DNS hosting, cloud management, user interface, integration and flexibility, marketing and branding, reporting and licensing, additional ports, GSM and Sonic Analyzer features, advanced features and pricing, load balancing and data filtering, DLP integration, reporting analytics and user support, affordability and competition, and support and automation.
Service and Support: The feedback on Check Point NGFW's customer service varies, with some customers appreciating its helpful and responsive nature, while others believe there is room for improvement. SonicWall TZ's support is deemed satisfactory, although there have been instances of language difficulties and delays in assistance.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Check Point NGFW can be complex and may require specialized knowledge and experience for certain configurations and migrations. The initial setup for SonicWall TZ is described as simple, direct, and user-friendly, with a seamless out-of-the-box experience.
Pricing: Based on the feedback, Check Point NGFW is known for its high setup cost, however, it provides flexible licensing options. SonicWall TZ has mixed reviews regarding its pricing and setup cost. That said, it is considered fairly priced for medium-sized companies. There are extra fees associated with its cloud management capabilities.
Comparison Results: Check Point NGFW is the preferred product over SonicWall TZ. Users appreciate Check Point NGFW's comprehensive security features, centralized management, virtualization capabilities, stability, ease of use, and scalability. They also value its ability to protect against next-generation attacks and its strong security features. Users consider the customer service and support for Check Point NGFW to be superior.
"The solution is scalable."
"Fortinet has a very good solution for Secure SD-WAN. One very good feature is that they have robust and simple FortiOS through which they provide all solutions. That's their strength. There's not much complexity involved with the Secure SD-WAN solution of Fortinet as compared to Cisco's solution, which has a lot of flexibility but complexity also comes with that flexibility."
"Customers want to load balance more than eight lines or six internet lines. FortiGate is the only solution that can accomplish this."
"The dashboard I have found the most valuable in Fortinet FortiGate."
"The most valuable feature is the FortiManager for centralized management."
"Easy to implement, and it is also reliable."
"Mainly the FortiGate reporting system is very good. It guides us through all the expectations of security. Fortinet provides us all that we need for security. Also, Fortinet FortiGate is a next-generation firewall. It is much more advanced than others."
"The stability and scalability of this solution are satisfactory. Its SD-WAN, VPN, and URL filtering features are very useful."
"Extracting data from the logs and utilizing the log analyzer tool provides valuable insights and enhances the product's overall effectiveness."
"Provides very good performance."
"We can also run policies with two or more people simultaneously without problems or the risk of developing the wrong policy."
"The logging and central policy management are the most valuable aspects for us as we were not having success earlier with the ASA in terms of upgrading/managing."
"All of the features are very valuable, but the most valuable features are the sandboxing and the advanced IPS/IDS."
"Check Point is awesome from a security standpoint. Based on our experience and also the experience of the other customers, it is a very stable appliance."
"I like the GUI."
"Check Point's most useful feature is threat prevention and extraction. It was tough to manage seven firewalls and a perimeter solution for IPS, anti-malware, anti-bot, and sandboxing."
"Good VPN connection."
"The most valuable feature is the user-friendly navigation."
"We are very much happy with the support."
"It does what it says it is going to do."
"Technical support is good."
"The VPN is quite useful for us, as well as the ATP."
"Ease of management and the VPN integration."
"They give good protection to my network and support it."
"Currently, without the additional reporting module, we only have access to basic reporting."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiGate should improve the VPN tokens."
"Application management can be improved."
"From a reporting perspective, there's room for improvement. They're providing FortiAnalyzer through which one can get some enhancements, but the visibility and reporting still need slight improvement."
"I have to say that the initial setup was complex. The deployment took a few days to get set up. Initially, we were using an IPVanish. We switched to this tool since we thought it would be easier. But it turns out it wasn't easier to set up and run."
"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."
"Compared to some other products, the DLP is not at par for the moment."
"If you have a long ruleset, you may experience performance issues on the GUI, and installing rule changes on gateways can take a comparatively long time."
"Lately, Check Point seems to be pushing new products too early."
"Sometimes there are security bugs, which is frustrating."
"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."
"The antivirus feature is a little bit weak and should be improved."
"Finding support is a little bit hard."
"While not being cheap, their pricing models are competitive. In the pricing structure, however, they need improvement."
"Check Point should add additional management choices."
"I think content filtering is the area this product should improve. It's a little tricky to get put in correctly."
"Although the pricing is good, it could always be lower. If we get to pay less, we're happier."
"It would be good if Analyzer would be part of the stock license, so even if a layperson is getting the device, he or she doesn't forgets about ordering the Analyzer because it's already there."
"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."
"We encounter issues while generating new reports."
"I would like them to make the interface a little bit easier to use so you can find out where in the heck you're going instead of having to go to 15 different places to get something installed."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"In an upcoming release, SonicWall could improve by adding cloud management for all devices for free or at a nominal cost. Currently, they have a cloud management platform but is not free. We have the MySonicWall portal for purchasing from them for software updates and renewals."
Check Point NGFW is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 279 reviews while SonicWall TZ is ranked 12th in Firewalls with 78 reviews. Check Point NGFW is rated 8.8, while SonicWall TZ is rated 8.0. 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 SonicWall TZ writes "Has efficient user access control feature and good technical support services ". Check Point NGFW is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense and Azure Firewall, whereas SonicWall TZ is most compared with Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX, SonicWall NSa and WatchGuard Firebox. See our Check Point NGFW vs. SonicWall TZ 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.