We performed a comparison between OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: OPNsense is highly regarded for its ability to adapt and grow, its ability to allow guest access, its user-friendly interface, its versatility, its reliability, its intrusion detection and prevention system, and the availability of a free version. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in their incorporation of machine learning, their ability to prevent attacks in real-time, their unified platform, and their robust security capabilities.
OPNsense has room for improvement in interface simplicity, bandwidth management, high availability, logging, integration, hardware updates, reporting, SSL inspection, and learning curve. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls can enhance customization, SD-WAN configuration, logging accuracy, management interface, documentation, VPN availability, training materials, external dynamic list feature, and internet filtering.
Service and Support: Some users find the customer service for OPNsense excellent, while others believe it could be enhanced. Opinions on Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls' customer service are divided. Some customers appreciate the support team's expertise and promptness, while others have faced challenges in contacting support.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for both OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is described as straightforward. Users with or without IT experience can easily navigate through either setup. The deployment time for both options can vary depending on specific circumstances. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls provide training materials that contribute to the simplified and user-friendly setup experience.
Pricing: OPNsense primarily incurs expenses for hardware, while the software is available for free. Additional costs may involve public IPs and underlying VMs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls are generally perceived as having higher pricing due to licensing and subscriptions. Nevertheless, this higher cost is deemed reasonable given the level of security and features offered by the product.
ROI: OPNsense delivers cost savings within a short period, eradicating the need for ongoing expenses. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls enhance visibility, reporting, and security, streamlining administration and ensuring a sense of security.
Comparison Results: Based on user feedback, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is the preferred choice when compared to OPNsense. Users find the initial setup of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls to be straightforward and easy. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is highly regarded for its embedded machine learning capabilities, strong security features, and comprehensive logging.
"The most important feature, normally for small business customers, is link load balancing."
"The SD-WAN is the most valuable feature."
"It is very flexible to use."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the SD-WAN and their IP4 policy."
"The security fabric is excellent."
"The most important features with FortiGate are the web filter and application controls. We can control our internet usage and use the web filter for application purposes."
"The UTM feature is quite good. FortiAP is easy to deploy because both Fortigate and FortiAP are under the same brand. Otherwise, you need to do more work on the configuration."
"It is user friendly, and has all the features you need."
"I find the solution to be user-friendly. It has a lot of reports and easy settings."
"It is a very good solution. I like the dashboard. I can see what is going on and manage it as I like it."
"OPNsense is easy to use and open source."
"The VPN server feature is the most valuable. It is integrated with Radius and AAA for doing accounting and authentication. Insight view is also an important feature for me at this time. It allows me to assess our network traffic. I also like the firewall feature. The BSD kernel has a packet filter. It is one of the most solid frameworks for firewalls. Its user interface is one of the best interfaces I have used."
"The DNS-level filtering is impressive for thwarting time scanners."
"The most valuable features are reporting, the Sensei plugin, and firewall capabilities."
"The IDS and IPS features are valuable. From the usability perspective, there is a lot of good documentation. As IT professionals, we found it very easy to configure the firewall. It was easy to configure and use."
"What I like the most about OPNsense is that it offers an easy-to-use dashboard for device management and control."
"They are regularly releasing new versions that include more integration with third-party services."
"The Unified Threat Management (UTM) module, which consists of the basic firewall and IPS services, is what the majority of our customers use in Palo Alto Firewall."
"The strengths of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls are application visibility and application awareness. Their strong point is identifying applications for traffic. So all of the policies that are configured are related to the application and not to a port."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the network protection."
"It is an extremely powerful solution as it provides visibility into all the network traffic, and offers a range of actions such as blocking websites or graphics, as well as load balancing. It's a great tool."
"The machine learning in the core of the firewalls, for inline, real-time attack prevention, is very important to us. With the malware and ransomware threats that are out there, to keep abreast of and ahead of those types of attacks, it's important for our devices to be able to use AI to distinguish when there is malicious traffic or abnormal traffic within our environment, and then notify us."
"The configuration is quite simple to understand."
"Overall, it is a good solution. It is stable. We use URL filtering, which is useful for blocking undesired URLs."
"FortiGate is really good. We have been using it for quite some time. Initially, when we started off, we had around 70 plus devices of FortiGate, but then Check Point and Palo Alto took over the place. From the product perspective, there are no issues, but from the account perspective, we have had issues. Fortinet's presence in our company is very less. I don't see any Fortinet account managers talking to us, and that presence has diluted in the last two and a half or three years. We have close to 1,500 firewalls. Out of these, 60% of firewalls are from Palo Alto, and a few firewalls are from Check Point. FortiGate firewalls are very less now. It is not because of the product; it is because of the relationship. I don't think they had a good relationship with us, and there was some kind of disconnect for a very long time. The relationship between their accounts team and my leadership team seems to be the reason for phasing out FortiGate."
"A sandbox would be good in order to be able to inspect the emails containing spam and be able to validate the emails that contain malware, prior to delivering to the customer."
"Stability and technical support are the two major issues I have found with Fortinet."
"The solution's framework needs to be frequently updated in order to have a stable solution."
"There are just some services that aren't available. For example, the Ethernet or point-to-point protocols. They could add these services to their product offering - especially services for ISPs."
"Fortinet FortiGate can improve by integrating the web application firewall and the DDoS protection part of the solution. Having a WAF feature, web application firewall, and proxy together would be a good benefit."
"The central management for the FortiGate Fortinet Firewall needs improvement. They have the manager to do the essential management for both SD-WAN and for the security policy. They should also improve the SD-WAN function."
"Technical support could be better. You don't always get the level of help you need right away."
"The solution could be more secure."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
"There are a few weaknesses. For example, there is a lack of some features that I have in certain commercial products."
"The ability to set the VPN IP address would be a welcome addition."
"The user interface could be improved, and the DNS section should be more intuitive."
"While they do have paid options that actually gives better features, for most of the clients, if they tend to take a paid option will instead opt for Fortinet."
"You will need additional training before you can actually start to use it."
"The solution would not be suitable for anything large-scale."
"I would like to see it provide us with intelligent information from the data that it captures, within the same cost."
"Palo Alto needs to improve their training. They do not invest in their partners. I have been a partner for seven years, and it is very expensive for me to certify my engineers."
"Customers don't want to buy extra things for extra capabilities"
"Its software updates can be improved. It sometimes becomes very slow with the software updates for different features. It should have an External Dynamic List of data. The malicious IP is not frequently getting updated in Palo Alto, and this should be done."
"Technical support can be faster at responding."
"Once in a while, they have new features being released that can be buggy. My criticism is more general to all sorts of network or security devices. In general, everybody is releasing less-tested software. Then, it usually ends up that the first few customers who get a new release need to end up troubleshooting it."
"Technical support could be faster."
"Generating reports is not so easy."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 162 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and Sophos XGS, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Sophos UTM. See our OPNsense vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls 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.
