We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Radware Alteon based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are fond of the load balancing feature for DNS and servers."
"It is stable."
"The solution's stability is pretty good."
"The iRule feature is very useful for inspecting HTTP. Sometimes, we use it for modifying the headers of the HTTP."
"The support from F5 BIG-IP LTM is good."
"The most helpful thing is that it's open-source. It's very easy to program and customize."
"The v11 clustering is a new technology they have brought in that does not require improvement. They are the leader in it."
"We like is how they integrate nicely with the Oracle PeopleSoft application."
"Radware has been characterized by being extremely robust. This gives us the confidence to offer our users a continuous service."
"With Alteon, the load-balancing options are practically unlimited. We haven't had any issues with offloading, decryption, putting in cookies, or any other load-balancing features. We can check URLs, etc., on the back end for load balancing instead of running a TCP check. We're also doing some certificate stuff on there. Alteon covers all of the standard load-balancing techniques, and we employ most of them daily."
"The most valuable aspect is the ability to customize the types of load-balancing scenarios needed for customized applications. Some of the load balancers on the market today are strictly out-of-hand load balancers for SSL or HTTP. Radware Alteon is most useful for customizing in-house applications based on ports and protocols."
"his solution allows me to secure applications, by blocking suspicious traffic based on the signature that has been enabled for that particular application."
"The strength of this solution is the application delivery controller."
"The solution has been very stable."
"I like the web GUI. It's very intuitive and easy to use."
"The most valuable aspect is that it establishes user security."
"The user interface of F5 BIG-IP LTM is old and could improve."
"Lacking in free training to help users understand the product more, so they would know how to correctly use it. Like other vendors and their products, becoming more proactive is an area for improvement."
"Security enhancement should be more user friendly."
"F5 has another solution to load balance servers on the cloud, which they got after the purchase of NGINX. It is deployed as Kubernetes or something like that, but the problem now is that they have two solutions for two situations. They should make F5 deployable on the cloud."
"I'm not very sure about the security with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). We have our own private data center, but we are going to migrate our private data center into the Azure cloud environment. Security will then be a major concern when we migrate our own whole infrastructure to the public cloud."
"There is a challenge in Pakistan. This is when there is a hardware failure. Sometimes, it takes more time to get a replacement because it is sent out from the U.S. or some other regional outpost. Thus, it takes two to three days to receive a replacement."
"For integration with other AWS environments, we do some tie-ins with some autoscaling groups. This has been challenging for us. We have had issues, where when autoscaling groups scale up, there are some instances which are not showing up in the proper size. Then, those IPs would get registered with F5, but never get released. Therefore, we are ending up with a whole bunch of ghosted IPs."
"The synchronization does works fairly well. However, if I were to make changes, I would make it easier to start the sync process."
"I would like to see future enhancements in security, specifically in threat protection."
"We recently had a problem with the tables Obsolete ARP which was observed by the support team. It would be good to diagnose and solve this problem with a patch since it is not documented that it will be solved in later updates."
"Performance could be improved."
"Radware Alteon could improve the troubleshooting from the command line interface, they could do a better job making it easier."
"It can be improved by combining the web application firewall (WAF) facility."
"The user interface can be improved."
"We don't integrate anything with it because most things don't integrate with Radware. If it were F5, we could integrate it. We can integrate F5 with practically anything that integrates with a load balancer, but that's not the case with Alteon."
"You need to have pretty good internal knowledge of the solution."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 7th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 33 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Radware Alteon is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "It's a good fit for a small team because the maintenance is easier and you don't need to know how to code". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and Kemp LoadMaster, whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, A10 Networks Thunder ADC, HAProxy and NGINX Plus. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Radware Alteon report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.
Apart from throughout consideration. Radware license charges based on throughput and F5 charges based on features only. For example, if you buy F5 with an appliance throughput of 10g that throughput available on day one, but if it's Radware, you will get a 1gbps license and hardware has 10gbps throughput. You can only use 1gbps on day one. On the load balancing side, both are equal only I rule is the game-changer. A lot of customization is possible with irule.
For ADC both are very good, But in the leader in Gartner of ADC products, the tops rivals are Citrix ADC and F5
They are very good and can do the job but only some major differences to consider are.
Citrix ADC - Has App Expert Wizard which is a GUI ready to use to build simple to complex traffic syntax rule easily. Any admin that has some good background sees this syntax can understand and configure, it is very easy. This is good for a big complex environment or in case your network admin leaves the job and new one comes to take the role.
GUI; Travesing each menu is very easy as they are all in the same pattern with every feature.
F5 - Use the iRule, which does the same job. If you like to write programming code with lots of { { } }, etc, it's ok. But for many admin teams, it may be hard to troubleshoot the traffics rules if the guy who wrote the rule left, not that hard to learn but still harder than GUI.
GUI- F5 GUI is sometimes too complex than needed, sometimes it's left, right, under have to drill down a lot just to get to the simple tasks.
Overall there are both good.