We performed a comparison between A10 Thunder TPS and Fortinet FortiDDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Based on previous equipment that we had, it's amazing that this device can do what it can do in a 1U form factor. The devices that we have right now have never gone over capacity and we've actually mitigated some pretty large attacks."
"Thunder TPS has automated mitigation and fully managed support in case the device cannot handle the attack. They have engineers available to respond."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The primary benefit that we see from their systems is that their filtering technology has the ability to detect and drop the malicious traffic from the legitimate traffic with a high success rate. That, in combination with the very small effort needed to manage their systems, are the two most important benefits to us."
"The solution's support is one of the coolest things about the product. I"
"They give us the ability to configure many features for DDoS. There are many items that we can use."
"We selected the solution because of its programmable automated defense using RESTful API. We didn't want to connect to the box. We wanted to be able to do some automation. We wanted to have our own portal because we wanted to connect our customers to our own UI using the A10 API. It has been good and exactly what we need."
"The most valuable feature of A10 Thunder TPS is load balancing."
"This solution can protect Layer 3, Layer 4 and Layer 7 attacks of applications for us."
"The product's initial setup phase was really easy."
"The solution is very user-friendly and very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the cloud DDoS scrubbing capability."
"The solution already has security profiles and it can protect from DDoS attacks and other kinds of attacks."
"Among its key features: Detects and mitigates DDoS attacks at L3 to L7; negligible to zero false-positives; Generates and sends reports without the need for an expensive third-party solution."
"It allows me to see all the traffic on my network."
"We have researched them all, and it's a good solution all around."
"The last issue we had to contact them about was just a question of a false-positive. The A10 system wasn't supposed to decide what is a false-positive. So if we send it good traffic, it's supposed to just pass that good traffic through. But we opened this last ticket because the A10 did block some of the good traffic. Their support had to tweak it a little bit, but it wasn't anything that took a long time."
"I would like for them to develop an advanced reporting feature."
"We currently do not use the solution's machine-learning-powered Zero-day Automated Protection because of an issue with it... We also use the aGalaxy platform, which is a management platform for the TPS devices. The issue is that some TPS features were added at the TPS level but weren't carried over to aGalaxy, and we manage all of our devices through aGalaxy. So we can't actually use some of the new features that are available on the TPS because that functionality doesn't exist in aGalaxy. That is one of my biggest complaints."
"We have had some issues with implementation. So, it is the only area that needs improvement."
"It is very difficult to implement. It should be made a bit easier to implement. There is also a lack of resources on the internet. They need to develop more resources."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"They have a cloud scrubbing feature that redirects the traffic if the on-prem appliance can't accommodate a large amount of traffic but it's not available where we are."
"If there's one aspect of A10 that needs improvement it would be the training. All of their training is done online, at least in what we've been exposed to. I would like to have a classroom environment for training... It would give [people] a chance to provision it."
"I would like to see analytics, big data."
"I find that there have been issues in the past year with the solution hanging. It freezes often."
"The only thing they need to do is to automate it. Today, you must create tools that do not require the use of an expert or anyone with special skills."
"The solution can be a little more user-friendly and it can be more affordable."
"There aren't really any aspects of the solution we are unhappy with. It's been a positive experience overall."
"The primary area for improvement is the on-premises capacity limit, currently fixed at 10 GB."
"Alerts and reporting features must be improved."
"The tool needs to focus more on the area of application traffic management, where it currently has some shortcomings."
A10 Thunder TPS is ranked 15th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 12 reviews while Fortinet FortiDDoS is ranked 16th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 12 reviews. A10 Thunder TPS is rated 8.8, while Fortinet FortiDDoS is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of A10 Thunder TPS writes "A highly stable solution that can be used for load balancing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiDDoS writes "Offers good technical support but has poor scalability". A10 Thunder TPS is most compared with Arbor DDoS, Cloudflare, Radware DefensePro, Corero and Imperva DDoS, whereas Fortinet FortiDDoS is most compared with Arbor DDoS, VMware NSX, Radware DefensePro, Fortinet FortiWeb and Edgio Global CDN. See our A10 Thunder TPS vs. Fortinet FortiDDoS report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.
