Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Check Point IPS vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.5
Check Point IPS offers peace of mind, cost savings, and efficient protection, providing significant ROI through enhanced security and reduced downtime.
Sentiment score
7.5
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention offers fast, comprehensive security, boosting user satisfaction and revenue despite high costs.
Efficiency has improved, as we've seen a reduction in attack investigations and also seen efficiency in systems administration, security-wise.
It offers insights into security threats, despite the inability to quantify its impact in numbers.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.5
Check Point IPS support is generally reliable and responsive, although some users experience delays due to detailed resolution processes.
Sentiment score
6.4
Palo Alto Networks' support is generally effective despite communication issues and regional differences, with most users rating it positively.
The customer support for Check Point IPS is great.
Our technical teams have personal relationships with our account executives and direct support people.
I rate technical support from Palo Alto as eight out of ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
Check Point IPS scales well across network sizes, supporting both on-premises and cloud deployments, enhancing performance and flexibility.
Sentiment score
7.9
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is highly scalable, adaptable across environments, but cost considerations may affect scalability.
We have moved to a hyper-scale master environment, allowing us to scale by adding additional gateways to the clusters.
Check Point IPS's scalability is good, as it can handle growth easily if our organization expands.
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is scalable and works well wherever enforcement points exist.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Check Point IPS is praised for stability and reliability, with minor hardware concerns and high user ratings.
Sentiment score
7.9
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is preferred for its stability, outperforming competitors, and requires proper firewall sizing.
Check Point IPS provides a very stable and reliable environment.
Proper sizing of the firewall models ensures that the system does not experience crippling performance issues.
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point IPS users need better detection, performance, support, documentation, integration, and automation, with concerns about cost and licensing.
Palo Alto Networks needs improvements in email security, user support, and analytics, while addressing complexity, false positives, and integration.
Automated attack path correlation in SmartEvent to improve situational awareness.
Visual analytics and automated attack path correlation in SmartEvent to enhance situational awareness and attack identification.
I believe they can improve on the algorithms to better identify and predict attacks, and they can also add its binaries to reduce false positives.
The behavioral detection capabilities could be expanded to address all threats at the perimeter, reducing the reliance on endpoint detection and response systems.
 

Setup Cost

Check Point IPS pricing is costly, but offers value with bundling, simple licensing, and justifiable costs through performance benefits.
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is costly yet valued for its features, particularly in threat detection and scalability.
Comparisons with Fortinet show that Check Point IPS is relatively more expensive, but we found it cheaper to retain it rather than switch.
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention requires an add-on license and is considered expensive compared to competitors like Cisco AMP and FortiGate firewalls.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point IPS is praised for its protection, ease of use, integration, and effective threat management with minimal false positives.
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention provides intuitive threat prevention with machine learning, excellent reporting, and seamless integration with other tools.
The integration with Check Point ThreatCloud ensures the IPS engine is updated with the latest attack signatures.
The solution employs behavioral heuristic analysis to block zero-day attacks using AI-powered engines.
Check Point IPS is very useful in providing access control at the network level and preventing access from suspicious sources.
As traditional signature-based mechanisms become less effective due to the evolving nature of attacks, this solution's focus on behavioral analysis is crucial.
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point IPS
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Palo Alto Networks Advanced...
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Check Point IPS is 5.7%, down from 9.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is 7.4%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

Greg Tate - PeerSpot reviewer
Great for detection and access with the capabilities of defining specific rules
Support is the biggest area for improvement. Check Point is responsive, however, their support agents seem to be very siloed in their ability and/or product knowledge. It takes time and escalation to get through most tickets as they are passed from one group to another and then back again. We are able to navigate our support issues with the aid of our account team, so I want to underscore that support is indeed responsive. However, the processes support techs have to follow seem to be the root cause of the support response issues.
Carlos Bracamonte - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust, reliable, simple to install and good technical support
We are attempting to improve the use of URL filtering beyond threat protection. I'm not sure what the remaining threat protection features are off the top of my head. But beyond that, we use URL filtering. We have three approved cases for using external dynamic lists that are stored in a bucket repository. Then, for each URL site that needs to be whitelisted, we add it to the external dynamic list in order to gain access to this email. I would like Wildfire to be implemented. We use the equivalent in Cisco is the integration policies. We have the Wildfire but we are not currently implementing it. We don't have the license to use it, but we are not currently implementing it until we present the use cases that the company gives some value to and they approve the use of it.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
851,491 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
23%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Check Point IPS?
The most valuable feature of the solution is called tunneling. Tunneling is one of the major security features that hackers cannot penetrate through.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point IPS?
Comparisons with Fortinet show that Check Point IPS is relatively more expensive, but we found it cheaper to retain it rather than switch.
What needs improvement with Check Point IPS?
Currently, the solution is good for my needs, so I don't have any particular improvements to recommend. However, a reduction in price would always be welcome.
Which is the best DDoS protection solution for a big ISP for monitoring and mitigating?
Arbor would be the best bid, apart from Arbor, Palo Alto and Fortinet have good solutions. As this is an ISP, I would prefer Arbor.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention?
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention requires an add-on license and is considered expensive compared to competitors like Cisco AMP and FortiGate ( /products/fortinet-fortigate-reviews ) fi...
 

Also Known As

Check Point Intrusion Prevention System
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Morton Salt, Medical Advocacy and Outreach, BH Telecom, Lightbeam Health Solutions, X by Orange, Cadence, Nihondentsu, Datastream Connexion, Good Sam, Omnyway, FIASA, Pacific Life, Banco del Pacifico, Control Southern, Xero, Centrify
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, SkiStar AB, TRI-AD, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point IPS vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,491 professionals have used our research since 2012.