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

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Hillstone I-Series Server B...
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
23rd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (21st), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is 3.4%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System is 2.0%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)3.4%
Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System2.0%
Other94.6%
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer373227 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Marketing strengths shine but regaining user trust needs significant effort
There are numerous things that could be improved about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) to get it back on track. Sollution for small branches: when we have to connect a lot very small branches (or sometimes only an ATM) we need something small, with LTE and with reasonable price. Cisco response is SDWAN but it is not always the case. Recently Cisco released some small firewalls but I have not tried them yet. Central management with FMC is a very good idea, but sometimes local management or monitoring is helpfull. With Cisco You have to decide: central or local. You cannot have both. Regarding usability, when you commit configuration on Cisco, it sometimes takes very long. Commits also take some time for the competition, but Cisco is definitely lagging behind the rest in this respect. Last but not least, for me as a professional is lack of CLI. With CLI, I can configure every firewall on the market except Cisco. CLI is very important in professional working, and IMHO it was an unwise decision by Cisco to remove it. Graphical interfaces are very nice, but when you've got thousands of objects in a big installation and have to configure many things, CLI is a much faster way to do it.
DAVI TEIXEIRA - PeerSpot reviewer
Physical Education Professional JR at Unimed
Beneficial AI detection, helpful support, but modern UI needed
The initial setup of the Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System requires a bunch of steps starting with installing the hardware and setting it up. However, most of the setup is done by the vendor. I rate the initial setup of the Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System an eight out of ten. The vendor provides free training in the software provided.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is valuable since it is a single vendor option, which makes it easier to manage all features from one dashboard."
"This solution has helped improve productivity and detect attacks before they happen."
"I would say it's a good product if you look at the primary functionality, which is intrusion prevention."
"The solution is stable and reliable, it does the job well."
"The tracking intelligence feature is very good. This solution provides us with the opportunity to detect threats in real-time."
"The solution very effectively provides malware protection and signature-based anomaly detection."
"We have found the product to be quite stable."
"The integration with the Cisco portfolio is very helpful."
"One or two people can maintain and support the solution. The maintenance is not difficult."
"The most valuable features of the Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System are the AI detection and monitoring of common threats."
 

Cons

"The inclusion of bandwidth management features would improve this product."
"I think that some initiation scripts might be helpful because they would make the configuration easier and more user-friendly for customers."
"Overall, it lacks user-friendliness. It could be easier to manage. I can train any customer using FortiGate or Palo Alto in a few days, but with Cisco, it takes much more time because the systems aren't easy to use."
"The SSL decrypt could be improved, but it's normal. All the devices in our platform need a lot of memory or CPU to do the SSL decrypt. This is an issue to improve in all platforms, not only in Cisco."
"I think the part of IPS and everything else needs to be better equated to the real needs or current needs of the business compared to the other manufacturer, because it is not straightforward, a way to configure it compared to the other competitors."
"The attack patterns and payloads go undetected in Cisco. We would like to see a new solution with more effective detection of attack patterns. There should be more data analyzing patterns as well which provides useful information."
"The only thing I think they may need to improve on a little bit is identifying software more correctly when you do network discovery."
"The user interface needs some improvement, it is a little rudimentary and not very intuitive."
"The UI dashboard view needs to be improved because it is ugly. If it was more modern it would be better. Additionally, better integration with other databases would be good."
"Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System can improve by having more anti-spam features that will hopefully eliminate all of the other threats."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licenses for this product are available for either one, or three year terms."
"The annual licensing tends to be expensive, but in terms of implementing the licenses, it's a very uncomplicated process and as easy as copy-paste in its straightforwardness."
"They are very expensive in some places and not reasonable at times for many customers. I have had customers choose another solution because of the high price."
"The cost of the license depends on the level of support that you have with Cisco."
"Cisco NGIPS is an expensive product."
"The pricing could be improved. Our customers have a yearly license."
"When it comes to pricing you pay for a permanent licensing structure. One, three, and five-year options. There are no extra costs."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
"The price of the solution is good. It is less expensive than the other solutions in the market. There are not any additional features or hidden costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
900,838 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise27
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco NGIPS?
I would rate the price for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) as high.
What needs improvement with Cisco NGIPS?
I am aware that we are not measuring some metrics or tracking access through Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS). In my opinion, Cisco could improve the Web GUI for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS).
What is your primary use case for Cisco NGIPS?
Our main use case for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is in-line traffic control, and we are using IPS in an in-line mode.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Sourcefire NGIPS, Firepower NGIPS
Hillstone sBDS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

American Electric Power, Huntington Bank, Keycorp, Nationwide, Transunion, Marriott, Inova Health, Ford, Thomson Reuters, Dow Chemical, Equifax, Chevron, Walmart, Coca Cola
Norbert Wiener University, Regional Government of the Amazon
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs. Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,838 professionals have used our research since 2012.