We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks PA-Series and SonicWall NSa based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are the policies, filtering, and configuration."
"The security features are about the best that I've seen anywhere."
"Initial setup is easy to configure."
"FortiGate firewalls are user-friendly, and I like the security profiling features."
"It is very flexible to use."
"It is a safe product."
"It is user friendly, and has all the features you need."
"The solution is very easy to understand. It's not overly complex."
"The product's most valuable feature is web filtering."
"Palo Alto Networks firewalls offer single-mode panel processing with live scanning."
"The solution provides good customer support."
"The solution is robust."
"The reporting feature and application ID functionality within Palo Alto Networks PA-Series are incredibly valuable to us."
"The tool's most valuable feature is WildFire."
"The most effective features for threat prevention in the PA-Series are its integration with Cortex and the use of machine learning AI for advanced threat detection."
"It is stable when you set up something and put it into production. Once it works, you don't have other tasks or actions to perform."
"Our old firewall was running as HA (High Availability) on two different but identical rack mounted servers. Moving to SonicWall allowed the company to move to one unit, yet accommodate more connections because it had sixteen ports and handled fail-over better than the old firewall solution."
"The product is simple to manage."
"The features I found most valuable are email security and web filtering."
"Content filtering reduces the load on the available bandwidth and restricts employees from using distracting websites on the job, which leads to more productive hours."
"Content Filtering and sandboxing are valuable features."
"I like the solution's configuration, interfaces, and user guides."
"The antivirus and items of that nature were quite helpful to have."
"This product has kept us safe and we haven't had any breaches."
"The cloud features and integration could be improved."
"There were quite a few problems with the stability of the system."
"The improvement is related to logs. Instead of the CLI, we should be able to have more insights into the logs of the firewall in the GUI."
"I need user-behavior analytics, to find threat scenarios from inside the organization, insider attacks. That would be very helpful for us. In addition, I would like next-generation features for small and medium businesses. These businesses require UTM, all in one product. Fortinet must include it."
"It is stable, but its stability can be improved."
"It is very expensive, and their support is not very good. I hope that their technical support will be better in the future."
"The security of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"The support from Fortinet FortiGate could improve. They are not easily accessible when we need them. They could improve their response time."
"The solution's licensing price could be improved."
"The technical support offered by Palo Alto is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The pricing of the solution needs improvement."
"There is room for improvement in streamlining this process for smoother transitions."
"Palo Alto should integrate artificial intelligence for security purposes in the background for well-known threats and new risks coming to the market."
"Utilizing these features as a unified solution can require additional setup, particularly when incorporating Panorama for centralized management, which may involve extra costs."
"In future releases, maybe Palo Alto can enhance and enlarge their portfolio with SIEM solutions. They already have an endpoint protection solution, SOAR solution, that's fine. But when it comes to standalone IDS/IPS solution or email security solution, for example, we don't have any product in that category for Palo Alto."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved because it is an expensive solution."
"I feel that the SSL VPN client software needs a lot of improvement."
"Potential improvement around the associated VPN cost"
"The filter settings are confusing and overly complicated. The user interface can be improved."
"We still get phishing emails that manage to come through from time to time."
"The product must enable integration with endpoint protection tools."
"The product likely isn't a good fit for a large organization."
"They should consider upgrading the capabilities within the GUI."
"The implementation for VLANs is a little bit cumbersome. It would be good to make that a little bit easier."
Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is ranked 17th in Firewalls with 28 reviews while SonicWall NSa is ranked 20th in Firewalls with 77 reviews. Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is rated 8.6, while SonicWall NSa is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks PA-Series writes "Offers trained customer support, stability and ease of use ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall NSa writes "Great performance and security with reasonable pricing". Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is most compared with OPNsense, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and WatchGuard Firebox, whereas SonicWall NSa is most compared with SonicWall TZ, Meraki MX, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall and Netgate pfSense. See our Palo Alto Networks PA-Series vs. SonicWall NSa 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.
