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.
"Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features are ease of use, flexibility, and most of the configuration we can be done using the GUI. When we compare Fortinet FortiGate with other solutions the firewall policy are very easy to understand."
"I'm pretty happy with its reliability. It is also very scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is the simple configuration."
"We have found it to be very reliable and that's why our teams and various users in our company use it as our main firewall every day."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"The secure web gateway module and the application control module are valuable. HA operations are very easy."
"The most valuable feature is the interface, which is very user friendly. We are utilizing most of the features, like content filtering. The firewall is powerful."
"UTM/NGFW features and FortiCloud for logs and backups are awesome."
"There are many features. VPN, firewalling, and intrusion detection are the main features that are most useful for us at this time."
"The most significant aspect is the protection it offers."
"The antivirus features are valuable."
"The user interface is very good. It's already quite simple and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is web filtering."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The updates are helpful and add to the solution in a positive way."
"Sophos Control Center is a good feature. We can monitor everything from the control panel."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It offers an easy initial implementation."
"In this solution, the most valuable feature is that it's a security device. Maintaining security is very valuable for us. The other feature that we did not find in other products is that it works well with thin client environments."
"Setup was straightforward. One person is enough for deployment."
"It is scalable."
"The most valuable features of Sophos XGS are the ease of use and powerful interface."
"It's easy to use, and the service is good. If anything goes wrong, their support system is very reliable."
"The most valuable features in Sophos XGS are identity and VPN. It is a very good solution that is able to detect and prevent a lot of malicious activity."
"The solution is very expensive."
"There are some problems that support cannot give you a logical reason as to why it happened. For example, I had a case where I was dealing with a WhatsApp application that was giving issues. Technical support gave more than one reason it could be giving issues, but none of them solved the problem. Eventually I solved the problem, but it was far from the solutions that support had given."
"Scalability is one of the disadvantages. When it comes to scalability, you have to actually change the box. If you want to upgrade it, you need to actually change the existing box and probably you take the system off to other sites."
"Some features of Fortinet FortiGate are actually fee enabled that are inconvenient for deploying in production. Other issues relate to isolation with Cisco products and your server."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"The support from Fortinet FortiGate could improve. They are not easily accessible when we need them. They could improve their response time."
"The Wi-Fi controller needs a lot of improvement."
"Fortinet Fortigate could benefit by simplifying some of their processes."
"I wish to see an antivirus feature added to the solution."
"It could offer a DNS Filter for blocking botnet networks."
"Its price should be improved. It should be cheaper."
"The response time could stand improvement."
"The pricing can be high unless you choose a longer contract."
"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."
"Better instructions should be provided as part of the technical support so that we can understand the functionalities. This will help us to troubleshoot faster."
"The manuals or guides we are given are too simple. When we are implementing the product, it is difficult for us as we don't have more detailed information."
"Sophos' technical support has degraded in the last couple of years. They seem to need to ask a lot of questions, even with simple problems, and take a long time to provide solutions."
"Compared to Fortinet, the cost is high."
"There are some bugs relating to the product that allow VPN users to bypass the firewall."
"Having previously worked with the Astaro Security Gateway platform (now called Sophos UTM), I can attest that the configuration and dashboard for this older platform was easier to manage than that of both Sophos XG and XGS. If it were up to me, I would prefer to go back to the older SG dashboard."
"They need intelligent reporting, not just your simple, standard reports."
"Support is great, however, it can always be improved."
"Sophos XGS could improve the price."
"There are some issues with conversion and user roles when upgrading to Cyberoam."
Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews while Sophos XGS is ranked 17th in Firewalls with 60 reviews. Sophos XG is rated 8.2, while Sophos XGS is rated 7.8. 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.