No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) vs Sangfor NGAF comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 13, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point Cloud Firewall ...
Ranking in Firewalls
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
246
Ranking in other categories
Managed Security Services Providers (MSSP) (1st), Vulnerability Management (5th), Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (3rd), Cloud and Data Center Security (3rd), Container Security (6th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (5th), WAN Edge (3rd), Unified Threat Management (UTM) (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (5th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Compliance Management (5th)
Sangfor NGAF
Ranking in Firewalls
32nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
34
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Firewalls category, the mindshare of Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) is 2.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor NGAF is 1.2%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewalls Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security)2.8%
Sangfor NGAF1.2%
Other96.0%
Firewalls
 

Featured Reviews

Oscar Nunez - PeerSpot reviewer
Ingeniero en redes y Telecomunicaciones at K-IT
Centralized management has reduced policy time and provides reliable multitenant protection
What I would like, what I think they should improve a little is the management of objects at large scale. When you work with multiple domains, there are thousands of network objects. Detecting duplicates and consistency across domains is a very manual process that should be more automated. Another thing: the SmartConsole interface is very powerful and very good, but the learning curve, compared to other solutions in the market from other manufacturers, could be modernized. I think it does not necessarily have to be done from a client application; it could be done via web, because via web I know that not all the options you have in SmartConsole are available. So it would be good if it could also be done from the web and all the options were available. Another thing that I would really like is more automation with Ansible or Terraform. I know it has improved in recent versions, but I think it is still not mature enough. Compared to other manufacturers that do have a bit more in terms of automation capabilities in integration flows with Ansible or Terraform, Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) could improve. Another thing that could be improved a little would be the TAC response time, because when there are very complex cases, I think there should be more speed initially, more ownership of those urgent cases, and not leave the customer waiting. This has happened to me: when I have cases open with Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) TAC, sometimes they do not respond and I have to keep insisting, and I think that part should improve. I do not know if it depends on who takes the ticket or on the severity of the ticket, but sometimes I have had to insist a lot, and that would be the only problem. Once they attend to me and become involved in the case, the responses they give are very professional and really help directly resolve the problems when there is a bug or troubleshooting to do. As I said, I would like to see a specific improvement in SmartConsole. I think if they improved it—how to say it—gave it a facelift so you could access all the options directly from a browser, that would be great, because sometimes, for one reason or another, you cannot download SmartConsole or, for some reason, the SmartConsole client does not start correctly, and you could do it directly from the browser. I think that would be a good option to improve. Another thing would be that in multidomain environments, I would like a global search function for objects and rules. That is, you could enter and search across all domains at once, because right now you have to go domain by domain, and in environments with many customers, you spend quite a bit of time; you have to exit one domain and enter another. So those would be the improvements I would like to see.
AK
Network Administrator at GC University Lahore
Leverage detailed reporting for effective attack management
We are hosting applications over the platform, including websites and NAT traffic from our side. Because it's deployed in our data center, which is fully operational, we have various applications hosted there, websites, FTP portals, making it quite comprehensive. Essentially, it performs all the…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature for us is the cluster support."
"The solution offers an excellent price, benefit, and installation relationship."
"Good interface and visibility."
"On Dome9, you can have reports on compliance, users created, and EAM access to the cloud infrastructure. For example, if some machine is exposed to the Internet, importing and exporting to the Internet when it shouldn't, we get immediate alerts if someone does this type of configuration by mistake. Dome9 is very important because AWS doesn't protect us for this. It is the client's responsibility to make sure that we don't export things to the Internet. This solution helps us ensure that we comply with our security measures."
"Despite the price being on the higher side, the value for investments is substantial."
"The product allows us to enhance the security of the implementations we have, helping resolve several security incidents that we previously had and could not see, since previously we did not have a solution that allowed us to quickly and safely manage each one of the activities."
"We get good insights into security, and we are more secure because we have more insights than we would get from other products."
"The product allows us to enhance the security of the implementations we have."
"We are Sangfor Gold partners and I'd recommend this solution for the SMB market, as it is cost-effective and reliable."
"We've found the technical support to be helpful."
"In four steps one can configure the entire firewall."
"It seems to be a durable, stable product."
"The absolute best part of Sangfor NGAF is their support; it's a 24/7 support channel, and the last time I requested their assistance I got a reply within three minutes and they helped solve the problem immediately."
"Sangfor is a good solution that provides a WAF and firewall solution; most other vendors, like Sophos and Fortinet and Cisco, only provide one solution, and that's a valuable feature of Sangfor."
"We can utilize our own network rather than paying for a private one."
"The tool's performance is good."
 

Cons

"The networking system updates, when delayed, can lead to misconfigurations and data loss."
"The only pain points we have had with it were when we did major version upgrades. Rather than being able to do incremental upgrades on those, we had to completely redeploy. I know that has changed recently, but we had some hiccups when we did the upgrades. This is the only issue we have had."
"The product needs to improve support. They don't consider my case the number one priority even though I want a quick resolution."
"Improvement is needed in the deployment models."
"The reporting needs enhancement. Currently, we are not always aware of the gateways' status, like CPU and RAM usage."
"More support from our partners would be beneficial. A lot could be explained more."
"There is room for improvement regarding the technical support provided."
"In general, we abandoned this solution this year. Each component of this solution, in my opinion, could be improved."
"An area for improvement would be the number of ports defined on the box. In the next release, I would like them to develop their provisioning stage of enrolling end devices."
"We have deployed many firewalls and have faced two or three faulty devices that we have to replace over a year because their power supply was faulty."
"The web interface needs to be improved, making it more user-friendly."
"The interface and user experience are horrible."
"They need to increase the number of ports in the firewall."
"The tool's support is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I would be happy if Sangfor developed a firewall designed specifically for home use, as well as for small businesses such as clinics and so on. A household version of the Sangfor firewall for your personal computer or laptop would be ideal, in my opinion."
"Sangfor NGAF could improve by refining its application control policies, especially in addressing challenges with certain types of applications."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's pricing is moderate. Its licensing costs are yearly."
"There is flexibility in the different licensing models that are offered."
"The tool's pricing is good. Customers want it to be cheap. I consider the pricing to be elastic. CloudGuard Network Security is perceived as cost-effective compared to using the built-in tools provided by the cloud."
"On average, it is normally on the lower end, being less expensive than Palo Alto or Cisco."
"Its price is very fair."
"Every project needs different pricing. I believe that when we talk with the particular guys, we will find a price for the customer. They are flexible in terms of that because we need to be flexible, and we have many companies who are aggressive with discounts."
"I would advise taking into account the existing number of devices and add a forecast of the number of devices to be added in the coming year or two, to obtain better pricing."
"The price could be better."
"For four to five physical appliances for a licensed firewall, it costs approximately $4,000."
"If you know you have around 200+ computer users on your network, then the Sangfor NGAF 5200-F-I model would be the minimum recommended model for that amount of users. This model includes modules for packet filtering, deep packet inspection, malware scanning, DSCP filtration, and many other features."
"Price-wise, I would not consider Sangfor NGAF to be a cheap product. It is an expensive firewall solution, though not as expensive as something like Palo Alto, which is costly. However, the higher price point is justifiable given the feature set the tool provides that other firewalls may not offer in a single dedicated appliance."
"It costs about 8 to 10 thousand dollars per year for 500 users, standard licensing fees included."
"I rate the product price as one on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"The price is unmatcheable."
"The product is very cost-effective compared to other brands or vendors."
"The solution has a TCO that is 32% to 50% less than Sophos, Fortinet, and SonicWall."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
16%
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business133
Midsize Enterprise55
Large Enterprise146
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?
Since we use a unified standard for using policies and modules in Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security), we can clearly plan which modules we need to activate on a parti...
What needs improvement with Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?
The main limitations of Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) are not in Check Point itself but in the cloud platforms on which it is deployed. Because not all clouds ha...
What is your primary use case for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?
Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) is the main manager that provides network security in different forms in my organization. The primary task that Check Point solves ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sangfor NGAF?
The licensing cost is quite high compared to other available firewalls in the market.
What needs improvement with Sangfor NGAF?
The cost of licensing is very high compared to other firewalls available here. There should be improvements in hardware scalability, allowing for more storage and memory capacity. Making the soluti...
What is your primary use case for Sangfor NGAF?
We are hosting applications over the platform, including websites and NAT traffic from our side. Because it's deployed in our data center, which is fully operational, we have various applications h...
 

Also Known As

CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point vSEC, CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point Virtual Systems, Check Point CloudGuard Network Security, Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Sangfor NGAF Firewall Platform
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Physicians Choice Laboratory Services, Helvetica Insurance
The Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation (Indonesia), Lawson, Inc. (Philippines), Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin (Indonesia), TEK Automotive (Italy), etc.
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Cloud Firewall (formerly CloudGuard Network Security) vs. Sangfor NGAF and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.