We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and Sophos XG based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is notable for its cutting-edge threat prevention, centralized administration, and focus on safeguarding cloud environments. Sophos XG is highly regarded for its robust capabilities, user-friendly interface, and extensive defense against harmful threats.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security could benefit from enhancements in the support system, feature additions, data protection visibility, DLP feature, configuration process, integration, documentation, and flexibility. Sophos XG requires improvements in antivirus, graphical interface, performance, logging, support, setup process, configuration, functionality, sales policies, firewall upgrades, network monitoring, content filtering, GDPR features, search engine, stability, user-friendliness, firmware upgrades, and remote access.
Service and Support: Some customers appreciate Check Point's technical support, while others are dissatisfied with the slow response time. Sophos XG's support receives mixed reviews, with some customers finding it helpful and responsive, while others express dissatisfaction with unhelpful and unresponsive assistance.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is described as straightforward and uncomplicated, although some users note that it can be challenging and necessitates technical proficiency. Sophos XG's initial setup is generally considered simple and straightforward, although certain users find it difficult or extremely challenging. The ease of setup is influenced by factors such as familiarity with the product and technical expertise.
Pricing: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is considered costly for setup, whereas Sophos XG provides flexible pricing based on functionality. Check Point's pricing varies with organization size and country, while Sophos offers competitive pricing, particularly for educational institutions.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security offers a cost-effective solution with improved performance, providing an ROI ranging from 80% to 85%. Sophos XG boasts an ROI of 100% or higher, reducing support costs and enhancing security practices.
Comparison Results: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security outperforms Sophos XG. Users find the setup of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security to be simple and intuitive. Check Point offers a wider range of valuable features, including VPN Blade, IPS Blade, URL filtering, and Applications Control Blade, along with advanced threat prevention capabilities and centralized security.
"It's an easy solution to set up."
"The reporting and monitoring are very good."
"FortiGate firewalls are easy to manage through a user-friendly web interface. They also have advanced features like DDoS and DLP. However, I wouldn't recommend enabling all of these features on one device because it can cause performance issues."
"Fortinet FortiGate is easy to use."
"FortiGate has a strong security topic which allows all of the Fortinet devices to communicate and share information which makes their security more powerful."
"A strong point of FortiGate is that the graphical interface is complete and easy to use, especially if we think there is a list of operations that we are able to perform inside."
"It is a good source for firewall protection."
"Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features are ease of use, flexibility, and most of the configuration we can be done using the GUI. When we compare Fortinet FortiGate with other solutions the firewall policy are very easy to understand."
"Workflows across the company ecosystem have can flow smoothly without experiencing any challenges."
"The features of the solution which I have found most valuable are its flexibility and agility. It's a fully scalable solution, from our perspective. We can define scaling groups and, based on the load, it will create new instances. It's truly a product which is oriented toward the cloud mindset, cloud agility, and this is a great feature."
"We have found the overall functionality of the product to be exactly similar to the physical product. The one good advantage is that it is cloud-based and can be deployed either as a part of a scale set or one can shut down the virtual machine and adjust the physical parameters of the virtual machine easily and bring it right back up."
"What's most valuable to me is that it's a contiguous solution that aligns well with the components that we've relied on and trusted from a traditional hardware, firewall, and unified threat management system. My engineers and analysts don't have to learn another platform. We have already entrusted our security controls to Check Point for perimeter and physical security, and now we can do so at the virtual layer as well, which is key to us."
"We find Check Point valuable because they are 100% focused on security. It totally closes the potential vulnerability channel. We can check our mail and our attachments and we can scan everything easily. We get an immediate report about the situation of the attachments. We can discover if the target's security attack was started from phishing, etc. We also enjoy using the additional features that protect our internal customer from targeted attacks."
"The comprehensiveness of the CloudGuard’s threat prevention security is great, especially once they integrate Dome9 in the whole thing. That really ties the whole thing together, so you can tie your entire cloud environment together into one central location, which is nice. Previously, we had three or four different tools that we were trying to leverage to do the same stuff that we are able to do with CloudGuard."
"Monitoring using SmartConsole and all its features is extremely easy, and I find SmartEvent an excellent monitoring tool for spotting threats and user behaviour."
"When browsing, it scans sites to ensure that they are safe and that no harm can be caused."
"The tool's most valuable feature is threat protection and DLP features. So far, basic DLP features like content protection and blocking. Furthermore, for remote users, features such as back filtering and application control are available, allowing for command and control from our side. It is very easy to understand policy applications."
"Great interface and in-built help is very intuitive."
"The stability of Sophos XG is good, it has good performance."
"The product offers many great features."
"The installation is easy. There is a wizard that can be used for a single connection making it simple and if you have multiple connections you can configure it manually."
"The initial setup is pretty simple."
"The solution seems to be very easy to use."
"I have found the feature allowing you to manage everything from a centralized location beneficial."
"The platform's interface could improve."
"The web-cache feature which was previously on the FortiGate device, but was deleted with the recent upgrade should be returned. It was a very valuable feature for us."
"The updates Fortinet provides are sometimes unstable."
"It would be a benefit if Fortinet would release a one-stop solution that is better integrated with other products and an automated emergency response system."
"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."
"Due to its higher cost, Fortinet FortiGate can lead to increased operational expenses."
"Its customer service could be better."
"The support system could be improved."
"In case the device is inaccessible due to some issue such as CPU or memory, there is no separate port or hardware partition provided for troubleshooting purposes."
"Regarding CloudGuard Network Security's integration with various resources like application gateways and application-based security groups, there's room for exploring dynamic access in those areas. A significant concern is the upgrade process. Unlike an in-place upgrade, upgrading the tool in Azure requires deploying a new resource, which can be hectic and less reliable. We have to spend something new to have the tool's latest version."
"There is a limitation with the version upgrade. We are using version 81.10 and from what I understand, it is problematic to upgrade this version. I do not know if that is true."
"It's meeting our needs at this time. If I could make it better, it would be by making it more standalone. That would be beneficial to us. I say that because our current platform for virtualization is VMware. The issue isn't any fault of Check Point, it's more how the virtualization platform partners allow for that partnership and integration. There has to be close ties and partnerships between the vendors to ensure interoperability and sup-portability. There is only so far that Check Point, or any security vendor technology can go without the partnership and enablement of the virtualization platform vendor as it relies on "Service Insertion" to maintain optimal performance."
"The product needs to offer multi-tenancy."
"The user experience might suffer if we don't have the time to follow up with our clients and ensure they are using the right options. Clients also want more local support in Portuguese and Spanish during their normal business hours. That's something I hear from my customers and my team, too."
"The user interface can be improved."
"I hope that Check Point continues to improve its technical documentation regarding the Check Point CloudGuard IaaS gateway and management system."
"The solution could be improved if it offered more documentation or at least provided more information about the products themselves."
"It is a very basic and entry-level firewall. It doesn't give very granular control over the traffic. It should have more granular control over the traffic. This feature should be there similar to Palo Alto and Cisco. It should have such advanced features."
"All of the options should be available when I renew my subscription for the year. As it is now, there are some limitations."
"Sophos XG could improve by making the remote access and VPN better."
"Content filtering could be more effective and efficient."
"Scalability it is a bit limited. We did a sizing exercise before the purchase. But that was just to fit our current needs. There was no room for having an option to upgrade the device. The only option that we have if we are grow in the near future, is to go for another model with higher specs, which is actually more expensive. In other words it doesn't have that modularity ."
"The reports could improve, they do not seem complete and more information could be added."
"Their support is fairly good, and they come back to me. I've had an issue once or twice where I couldn't understand what the support person was saying because those calls were probably routed to India. They were a bit difficult to understand, but it is generally not an issue."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 117 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "The solution has good threat emulation, threat extraction, and reporting features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Firewall, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos XGS, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and SonicWall TZ. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Sophos XG 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.
