We performed a comparison between OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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 solution can scale well."
"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."
"The features that prevent internet connections, the filtering are the most valuable because we did not have any internet protection before."
"FortiGate improved our security. It's one of the best hardware firewalls."
"The simplicity of the configuration and the stability of the product are most valuable. The VPN concentrator is very useful."
"From the firewall perspective, the rules and policies are very sufficient and easy to use."
"The most important features of Fortinet FortiGate are the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) and firewall control applications."
"I like that they have given me a solution at a fair price."
"The interface and the dashboard are the most valuable features of this solution."
"It has an open license. It works very well, and there is an update every month."
"What I like the most about OPNsense is that it offers an easy-to-use dashboard for device management and control."
"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."
"The most valuable features are reporting, the Sensei plugin, and firewall capabilities."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to configure."
"It is a very good solution. I like the dashboard. I can see what is going on and manage it as I like it."
"The most valuable features in OPNsense are reporting and visibility."
"In the newer version, there are 3850s, all of them are scalable. They fit better into the medium or small businesses."
"The most valuable features are web control and IPS/IDS."
"Palo Alto Networks VM-Series's most valuable feature is the visibility of the environment."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The most effective features for threat prevention are application-based prevention and WildFire. These features cover various threats, such as ransomware, malware, etc. They provide real-time visibility. By applying appropriate policies, threats can be blocked."
"In Palo Alto the most important feature is the App-ID."
"It has a good performance which helps you with the stability of your virtual environment."
"The most valuable features are security and support."
"The solution lacks multi-language support."
"It could use better throughput on some of the smaller boxes for the branch offices."
"The solution could be more user friendly."
"This product could be improved with Active directory integration and better handling in IPsec and GRE Tunnels."
"They can do more tests before they release new versions because I would like to be more assured. We had some experiences where they release something new and great, but some of the old features are disabled or they don't work well, which impacts the product satisfaction. The manufacturer should be able to prove that everything works or not only that it might work. This is applicable to most of the other services, software, and hardware companies. They all should work on this. We cannot trust every new release, such as a beta release, on the first day. We wait for some comments on the forums and from other companies that we know. We always wait a few weeks before we use the updated version. They should also extend the VPN client application, especially for Linux versions. Currently, it has an application for Linux devices, but it doesn't work the way we want to connect to the VPN. They use only the old connection, not the new one. They have VPN client applications for Windows and Mac, but they can add more useful features to better manage the devices and monitor the current health of each device. Such features would be helpful for our company."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"Technical support could be better. You don't always get the level of help you need right away."
"In the balance between links feature normally you can just choose one option to balance. It would be better for the solution to have more than one option, preferably three."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
"The interface isn't so friendly user. But we have some technicians here who are quite confident with this tool. OPNSense could maybe add sets of rules so it's simpler to manage different groups with particular needs."
"OPNsense could improve by making the configuration more web-based rather than shell or command-line-based."
"The logging could improve in OPNsense."
"The user interface could be improved, and the DNS section should be more intuitive."
"Its interface should be a little bit better."
"There are some add-ons that need enhancements to make management easier for users, especially the reporting features. Some reports don't show the level of detail I'm looking for, and I've had trouble installing certain add-ons, especially for Internet bandwidth shaping within my company."
"I would like better documentation concerning the provided packages and their integration."
"It would be good if the common features work consistently in physical and virtual environments. There was an integration issue in the virtual deployment where it didn't report the interface counters, and we had to upgrade to the latest version, whereas the same thing has been working in the physical deployment for ages now. It seems that it was because of Azure. We were using VMware before, and we didn't have any such issues. We do see such small issues where we expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. There also seems to be a limitation on how to do high availability in a virtualized environment. All features should be consistently available in physical and virtual environments. It is not always easy to integrate Palo Alto in the network management system. We would like to be able to compare two network management systems. They can maybe allow monitoring an interface through the GUI to create a reference or do a baseline check about whether your network monitoring system is actually giving you the correct traffic figures. You need traffic figures to be able to recognize the trends and plan the capacity."
"I would like to have automatic daily reporting, such as how many users have connected via SSL VPN."
"The utilization monitoring and GUI have room for improvement."
"Palo Alto Networks VM-Series needs to improve its order process."
"In the next release, I would like to see better integration between the endpoints and the firewalls."
"I would like a way to do everything programmatically, or be able to copy the configs from different prices at different levels."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
"It is not very easy to scale up the solution."
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 53 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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 VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and IPFire, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Juniper SRX Series Firewall. See our OPNsense vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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.
