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

A10 Thunder TPS vs Arbor DDoS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

A10 Thunder TPS
Ranking in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Arbor DDoS
Ranking in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection category, the mindshare of A10 Thunder TPS is 1.8%, down from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Arbor DDoS is 15.8%, up from 14.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection
 

Featured Reviews

David Mello - PeerSpot reviewer
A highly stable solution that can be used for load balancing
We contacted the solution's technical support to maintain and exchange the power supply. A few versions ago, we had some CPU and memory problems. We just started the appliance, and it was already on 70% of CPU usage. We first contacted our reseller in Brazil and then escalated the issue to A10 Thunder TPS support. The reseller in Brazil was a little slow, but the A10 Thunder TPS support was fast.
Tushar Sail - PeerSpot reviewer
A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks
Arbor DDoS offers security features that automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks. When a DDoS attack is detected targeting a specific IP, the Arbor device immediately becomes in line with the traffic and actively works to prevent the attack. This auto feature is one of the best aspects of Arbor DDoS, as it ensures timely and effective protection against such attacks.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution has reduced the amount of manual intervention required during an attack. We have the inline solution and when it comes to the customers that we have on it, it has saved us some troubleshooting time."
"The solution's support is one of the coolest things about the product. I"
"We can keep track of all the customer's requirements. We can forecast our trails and we can forecast our overall financial things."
"We selected the solution because of its programmable automated defense using RESTful API. We didn't want to connect to the box. We wanted to be able to do some automation. We wanted to have our own portal because we wanted to connect our customers to our own UI using the A10 API. It has been good and exactly what we need."
"The primary benefit that we see from their systems is that their filtering technology has the ability to detect and drop the malicious traffic from the legitimate traffic with a high success rate. That, in combination with the very small effort needed to manage their systems, are the two most important benefits to us."
"The product's initial setup phase is very simple."
"Based on previous equipment that we had, it's amazing that this device can do what it can do in a 1U form factor. The devices that we have right now have never gone over capacity and we've actually mitigated some pretty large attacks."
"The solution is easy to use and implement in terms of operations."
"It has an easy-to-understand GUI...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It provides packet capture and we can block or whitelist whichever IPs we need to. Whatever traffic we want to block - and we get IPs from internal teams and from national teams - we block at the Arbor level only, because if it gets to the firewall then firewall bandwidth will be taken."
"The solution looks into volumetric attacks and gets them resolved."
"Predefined filters/techniques to easily stop the attacks and start mitigation."
"I like all the features together as a whole."
"Companies that live from their presence on the internet will get a very high return on investment from Arbor."
"We use it not only for DDoS detection and protection, but we also use it for traffic analysis and capacity planning as well. We've also been able to extend the use of it to other security measures within our company, the front-line defense, not only for DDoS, but for any kind of scanning malware that may be picked up. It's also used for outbound attacks, which has helped us mitigate those and lower our bandwidth costs..."
"It's very flexible and we can easily deploy it to our network. It's very user-friendly. We can do everything via the web interface and troubleshoot easily from the CLI. It's not complicated."
 

Cons

"It is very difficult to implement. It should be made a bit easier to implement. There is also a lack of resources on the internet. They need to develop more resources."
"I rate Thunder TPS seven out of 10 for scalability."
"The last issue we had to contact them about was just a question of a false-positive. The A10 system wasn't supposed to decide what is a false-positive. So if we send it good traffic, it's supposed to just pass that good traffic through. But we opened this last ticket because the A10 did block some of the good traffic. Their support had to tweak it a little bit, but it wasn't anything that took a long time."
"I would like for them to develop an advanced reporting feature."
"We currently do not use the solution's machine-learning-powered Zero-day Automated Protection because of an issue with it... We also use the aGalaxy platform, which is a management platform for the TPS devices. The issue is that some TPS features were added at the TPS level but weren't carried over to aGalaxy, and we manage all of our devices through aGalaxy. So we can't actually use some of the new features that are available on the TPS because that functionality doesn't exist in aGalaxy. That is one of my biggest complaints."
"If there's one aspect of A10 that needs improvement it would be the training. All of their training is done online, at least in what we've been exposed to. I would like to have a classroom environment for training... It would give [people] a chance to provision it."
"Its documentation could be better."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"When it comes to some false positives, we need to tweak the system from time to time. There is room for improvement when it comes to the actual mitigation because of some false positives."
"An issue which needs to be addressed concerns information I received of attacks on the radar and Arbor, allegedly, not taking any action."
"The following areas need improvement: opening and tracking support tickets, online support resources, software upgrades/updates and replacement media, and event management guidelines."
"I think the diversity of protection is extremely limited. It must be expanded in future upgrades and versions."
"I would also like more visibility into their bad actor feeds, their fingerprint feeds. We try to be good stewards of the internet, so if there are attacks, or bad actors within our networks, if there were an easier way for us to find them, we could stop them from doing their malicious activity, and at the same time save money."
"There should be an automatic way to configure it to monitor traffic and decide which is an attack and which is not. In Arbor, you need to tweak and set all parameters manually, whereas in Check Point DDoS Protector, you can select the lowest parameters, and over the weeks, Check Point DDoS Protector will learn the traffic and you can then tighten some of the parameters to decide which traffic is regular and which is malicious."
"On the main page there are alerts that we are unable to clear, even though the issue has been resolved."
"It is an expensive product, so there is room for improvement in terms of pricing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is very reasonable."
"We may need to pay fifty percent more if we purchase other solutions. For the payments made to A10 Thunder TPS, we have received three-year support."
"The tool is expensive. If one is low price and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price as a ten."
"Pricing was much higher with Arbor (APS) for the same type of solution."
"The financials are always a challenge with this type of technology. That's not really a product-functionality thing but it's the area where we push A10 the most."
"We did a price survey, and compared to other solutions, A10 Thunder TPS wasn't cheap."
"We had a customer who was down for six hours and the loss of revenue for him was three times the price he was paying for us per year. The customer just said, "I don't care about paying you because on only one attack I saved money. It's three times better than losing money.""
"As far as I know, they are the best in this sector, in DDoS protection. They know it, I know, because their service prices are too high. They provide cloud DDoS protection for ISPs, but that is also too expensive."
"It is an expensive product. I use this product for its different features."
"Arbor's products are very expensive. Their competitors are cheap when compared with Arbor."
"I don't know about the pricing details as our company's service provider offers us the solution as an inbuilt feature within the internet bandwidth they provide us."
"Because the solutions from competitors are very different, it's not easy to compare. However, the licensing from Arbor is clear and understandable and the pricing is reasonable when looking at the market, in general."
"The price of Arbor DDoS depends on many parameters. It depends on the physical capacity of the environment, and it is not a straight-line price. It's fairly competitive in the market on the price."
"I don't deal with the pricing, but it seems that you need to get basic support in order to upgrade the software and implement some patches."
"I believe that the price of Arbor DDoS falls under the bracket of medium to high price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
34%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about A10 Thunder TPS?
The most valuable feature of A10 Thunder TPS is load balancing.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for A10 Thunder TPS?
The tool is expensive. If one is low price and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price as a ten.
What needs improvement with A10 Thunder TPS?
The solution needs improvement in terms of fail-open. We need separate fail-open kits connected to A10 Thunder TPS and the network so that network traffic will pass through normally when the tool g...
Which is the best DDoS protection solution for a big ISP for monitoring and mitigating?
I would say if it’s an ISP that will build a scrubbing center, Netscout/Arbor is a good solution. In all other solutions, Imperva is a great choice.
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 do you like most about Arbor DDoS?
The quality of the technical support provided by Arbor DDoS is premium.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Arbor Networks SP, Arbor Networks TMS, Arbor Cloud for ENT
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DDoS defense solution trusted for more than 200 service providers, online gaming, and enterprises including; Bungie, Comcast, KDDI Corporation, Leaseweb, Microsoft Azure, NTT Docomo, Softbank, Turkcell Superonline, Verizon and more.
Xtel Communications
Find out what your peers are saying about A10 Thunder TPS vs. Arbor DDoS and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.