We performed a comparison between Check Point NGFW and Juniper SRX Series Firewall based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point NGFW is highly recommended for its extensive security features, convenient centralized management, and impressive virtualization capabilities. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is well-known for its user-friendly interface, effortless usage, and excellent support.
Check Point should focus on improving integration, upgrading hardware, reducing costs, and enhancing stability. Juniper needs to work on capacity scalability, pricing strategy, reporting capabilities, user interface, device reliability, and feature enhancements.
Service and Support: The customer service for Check Point NGFW has garnered varying opinions, with some customers finding it helpful and responsive, while others believe there is room for improvement. Juniper SRX Series Firewall's customer service is generally deemed satisfactory, with customers appreciating its helpfulness and knowledge. However, there have been occasions where response times were slower and the need for escalation arose.
Ease of Deployment: Check Point NGFW's initial setup can be complex and may need expertise and experience for specific configurations and migrations. Juniper SRX Series Firewall generally has a simple setup process, although it may require CLI experience and coordination with the vendor.
Pricing: Check Point NGFW is known for its expensive setup cost, particularly when compared to other options. Users have found the process of adding new licensing to existing devices to be complex, especially for larger enterprise-level devices. Juniper SRX Series Firewall offers a more reasonable and affordable setup cost. Its setup process is straightforward, and the pricing is considered reasonable.
ROI: Check Point NGFW offers cost savings, simplicity, and effective security enforcement, providing peace of mind once the protection level is understood. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is a valuable investment, delivering positive returns and enhanced security features.
Comparison Results: Based on the review answers, the Check Point NGFW is preferred over the Jun SRX Series Firewall. Check Point NGFW offers comprehensive security features such as URL filtering, intrusion prevention systems, identity and access management, and application control capabilities. It also provides centralized management and virtualization features, stability, ease of use, and scalability. Despite its higher pricing, Check Point NGFW is considered more reliable and secure. Additionally, its customer service and support are generally satisfactory.
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"The solution is stable."
"Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”"
"The solution can scale well."
"Our project needs to link two sides through the internet. One of these was in Cairo and the other in another city. We used FortiGate as the integrating solution between the two locations, i.e. the Fortinet 30E & 100E."
"It is a one box solution, which covers most of the edge device’s requirements."
"The most important feature, normally for small business customers, is link load balancing."
"This version is stable. I don't have any issues with this solution, in our environment, it works well."
"Check Point has an awesome price-to-benefit ratio, netting you an awesome throughput of IDS/IPS capability compared to Palo Alto, Cisco, and so on."
"I think that the most valuable feature is the prevention of known and zero-day threats because they are constantly trying to access your company and compromise its data."
"It provides end-to-end resolution."
"Log storage gives us insights when required."
"Check Point is awesome from a security standpoint. Based on our experience and also the experience of the other customers, it is a very stable appliance."
"The product is flexible."
"We used Check Point for implementation, and they are top-notch. They know the hardware and software better than anyone."
"The solution is easy to use. I like the monitoring the most."
"There is a lot of flexibility in how you can commit, check, and back out of a configuration."
"The deployment is quite easy and fast."
"The solution is stable, inexpensive, and works well for medium size companies."
"What I like the most about Juniper is that they have the same CLI on all routers, switches, and firewalls. If you have worked with any Juniper device, such as a Juniper router, you will be able to work with an SRX, which is really cool. It is a nice experience to work with every device of Juniper, not only firewalls."
"It helps us perform our daily jobs."
"The Juniper SRX series is easy to use."
"From a protection perspective, it provides a network perimeter security function for our company."
"The setup is pretty straightforward."
"I would like to see more advanced developments of a wireless controller in the future."
"I would like Fortinet to add more automation to FortiGate."
"If they had better integration with security products, such as Cisco ISE or Rapid Threat Containment, then it would be an improvement."
"The support structure needs to be improved because every time we contact them, there is a delay in the response."
"It would be good if they had fewer updates."
"Due to its higher cost, Fortinet FortiGate can lead to increased operational expenses."
"A couple of things I've seen that need improvement, especially in terms of a hard coding. The driver-level active moment really is out-of-the-box and we have to have contact the customer support and sometimes it is difficult to resolve."
"It needs to improve its ISP load balancing."
"VMware is not supported by the platform."
"Some features, like the VPN, antispam, data loss prevention, etc., are managed in an external console. In the future, I'd like all features in the same console, in one place, where we can see and configure all features."
"With the version we're on, it's a bit time-consuming if you have multiple IP addresses to add. But in the later versions, which we're moving to, it makes it a lot easier to add IP addresses with dynamic objects, as they call it."
"The policy installation length is still too long. It was promised that the time would be severely reduced in newer versions, but it is still too long."
"The training for Check Point Firewall should increase, including the number of Training Centers. For most new people in our organization, we have to provide them training from our end, as they are not trained in Check Point Firewalls. So, we have to do the training, from our point of view, to make our engineers able to use Check Point Firewalls. However, with other firewalls, they are already trained, so we are not require to provide them training. This could be improved by the Check Point Community."
"The virtual environment is not stable at all. We have some customers who are using the virtual environment feature, and sometimes it crashes. We have many tickets open and the response is not as good as expected. We have to wait months for a resolution."
"Check Point could do better to include acceleration technologies like SD-WAN in an integrated or embedded way to provide these new features that Check Point never had and is of great importance in the market."
"When it comes to Check Point's small business gateway series, there might be a need for hardware upgrades, as configuring them can sometimes be a bit challenging."
"The capacity can be limiting. We have outgrown its capacity. You can only scale up to a certain extent, depending on the device purchased."
"While the GUI is pretty good on the Juniper side, there can still be tweaks made to it that will make it even better."
"J-Web, Juniper Web, is sometimes not working great when users are increasing their internet use. Additionally, they need to improve the GUI, graphical user interface, and the firewall management needs to improve. Their CLI is good, but sometimes the GUI is very slow."
"In the future, I would like to see the UI more responsive"
"We purchased three devices and all three have been replaced under RMA."
"As a networking person, I don't really have any major issues with this device. Based on my experience of using it in a cluster, it could be more stable. I had an incident when one of the SRXs in a cluster couldn't learn ARP. It is a good solution, but firewalls don't seem to be an area of development for Juniper. They are focusing on data centers, routers, and switches, not firewalls."
"The CLI is verbose. You have to say a lot to do a little. I don't like that part of it. Cisco's command syntax seems to be a good bit more concise. When you're trying to get something done, you don't want to have to type a bunch."
"The CPU switch could be improved for a better overall performance of traffic flow."
Check Point NGFW is ranked 5th in Firewalls with 277 reviews while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 86 reviews. Check Point NGFW is rated 8.8, while Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Check Point NGFW writes "Good antivirus protection and URL filtering with very good user identification capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". Check Point NGFW is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense and Meraki MX, whereas Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Meraki MX. See our Check Point NGFW vs. Juniper SRX Series Firewall report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors, best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors, and 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.
