We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Remote Access solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Scalability is great. We have been able to grow as a corporation due in part to this type of solution."
"The biggest advantage of Check Point Remote Access VPN is that we already use the Check Point firewall. We only needed to enable the feature and do the configuration in order to enable the VPN feature. We didn't need to buy or manage new hardware. This was a big advantage."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN enables us to access on-premise applications while working from remote locations."
"For us, it was essential to integrate with Active Directory, which is our credentials repository."
"The solution offers great security features, including zero-day protection, malware protection, anti-phishing, et cetera."
"Our number of users working remotely vastly increased during the COVID 19 pandemic. Check Point Remote Access VPN allowed us to quickly make the transition from in-office to remote work."
"Setup using the manuals was easy."
"For a basic setup, implementation is quite easy."
"We enjoy its overall ease of use."
"You can create multiple virtual servers on F5 BIG-IP technology, and within multiple virtual servers you can have multiple nodes, where a node equals two application servers."
"We have found the consistency of the application always being the way it is supposed to be as its most valuable feature."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It is stable."
"Stable and scalable network traffic management solution for applications. It has good performance."
"I have Big-IP change and control manager, which give me the roll back option. Therefore, I can view the last things which happened on the device."
"Along with load balancing, we perform a lot of packet inspections, URL rewriting, and SSL interceptions via iRule."
"Sometimes we have some small problems with Check Point Remote Access VPN. For example, problems with authentication."
"Improvements for Check Point Remote Access VPN could include enhancing mobile connectivity for a smoother user experience."
"In an environment with multiple cluster checkpoints, the global properties common to all clusters in some cases give problems."
"The connection has gotten less smooth as the number of users increases. The issue is that the logs fill up quickly. Too many users are connecting remotely. It worked great when we only had a few remote connections. Now, it is disconnecting people and dropping the internet connection."
"The main feature that would be improved within Check Point Remote Access is its operation within Linux OS, as it currently does not have many features for that OS."
"The product’s architecture is a bit distributed."
"The fully-featured security module is only supported on Windows and Mac systems, which means that organizations with Linux will face issues providing secure access."
"The VPN remote Access blade could be improved."
"It requires a particular skill or training before being able to manage it."
"The solution could improve the documentation."
"The user experience for dashboards and reports can be improved. They should make dashboards and the reporting system easier for users. They need to add more reports to the dashboard. Currently, for complicated reports, I have to do the customization. It should have more integration with network firewalls to be able to gather all the information required for traffic management."
"If one virtual portion is unavailable, it can cause issues."
"A lot of functions that are attributed to iRules can actually be simple profile changes. iRules do have a certain performance impact. Therefore, instead of writing simple iRules, they can create certain profiles for classes that will perform the same function."
"Security and Reporting."
"The management interface is unclear, complex, and not concise. I would like a better user interface."
"The GUI needs improvement."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 5th in Remote Access with 62 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Reduces maintenance downtime and has a strong user community". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Fortinet FortiClient, Check Point Harmony Mobile and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and A10 Networks Thunder ADC. See our Check Point Remote Access VPN vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.
We monitor all Remote Access 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.