We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Meraki MX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the VDOM, which allows the customer to have multiple firewalls in a single campus."
"The VPN is the most valuable feature."
"It works very well. It has a lot of different functionalities. Its cost is also fine for our customers."
"Virtual Domains (VDOMs) are a feature that we found valuable."
"It's very easy to set up, it's very easy to make policies and, for an organization, that means you don't need IT expert in firewalls. You just need to have somebody who knows a little bit of IT, and that's it. With other products, you need someone with a "Masters" degree in firewalls."
"The performance is good."
"The response is very quick and they can visually resolve our problems in a short period."
"I like that you are able to manage FortiGate from the FortiManager to create a more centralized environment."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support."
"I don't have anything bad to say about the product. I absolutely love it."
"Next Generation Firewall's best feature is that it can be managed on one platform."
"The VPN is great."
"The simplicity of the solution is its most valuable asset. It's very user-friendly."
"It provides decent protection for the LAN, especially in run mode."
"The people we deal with is a local partner in Cambodia and we can get good support from them."
"Meraki MX offers advanced filtration options, plus it behaves like a router and a firewall at the same time."
"We've had no issues with the scalability or the stability of this solution"
"Point-to-point VPNs can dynamically follow IP changes with no need for static IPs."
"The security level of our organization has changed by using Meraki MX Firewalls. We didn't have the UTM before, but now we have sandboxing, tray scanning, attack preventions and monitorization. Our security level has improved."
"In general, Meraki MX is easy to work with."
"It has a helpful feature for database troubleshooting issues."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"They have very good technical support and I have relied heavily on them."
"MTBF: Hardware failure is more common when compared to SonicWall or Cisco ASA."
"They sometimes hide some features and if you want to enable them, you have to go in the CLI, enable the feature and configure it through the CLI. Customers, typically, like everything to be done by the GUI."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"There is room for improvement related to the logging and reporting aspect."
"The feature which gives us a lot of pain is ASIC architecture."
"The license renewal process, annual renewal price, and the web application firewall features should be improved."
"A lack of integration between our data centers."
"Lacks sufficient security options."
"The solution's support could use improvement."
"We feel the product's technical support could be better, as this relates to the solution itself, to the installation of the product, and to having a proper understanding of the case."
"My team is looking for more throughput and better integration with our security framework."
"They should have a GUI on the product itself, not a separate management tool to be used on the management server or on a server to be used to manage the file. It should be all in one device. The device should be controlled through its own GUI. They also have to improve the learning center and the documents as the documents don't really help."
"Its interface is complex when compared with a firewall like FortiGate. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall needs a management console, whereas FortiGate doesn't need any console. When you have a few devices, a console is not really necessary. It's good to have a private console only when you have a lot of devices."
"The security features need to be improved."
"While they offer a comprehensive bundled solution, some users may prefer on-premise deployments for certain features, such as URL filtering."
"Next Generation Firewall's configuration could be improved."
"You can only have one tunnel in the whole infrastructure — one tunnel with one device."
"MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients."
"Meraki MX firewalls are great for small to medium-sized businesses, but other solutions are better for enterprise-sized companies."
"They're very complacent and I find the rule set to be a little arcane."
"It would be nice if the different services, including the SIEM SOC and endpoint detection and response (EDR) were integrated into one, so that I don't have to go to different vendors for different services."
"Meraki has some hidden features and information that is only privy to their engineers. If that information became available to us, then it would improve our ease of management, and we would be able to make certain adjustments instead of having to go to them."
"The problem is that the two licenses do not currently integrate. We have to create separate companies and do an interconnection."
"What I would like to see in the next version is to have more interfaces for WAN links."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 41 reviews while Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 59 reviews. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6, while Meraki MX is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Provides decent protection for the LAN but complicated interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point NGFW, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and Cisco Secure Firewall, whereas Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Netgate pfSense. See our Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs. Meraki MX 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.