We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and Sophos XG based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is notable for its cutting-edge threat prevention, centralized administration, and focus on safeguarding cloud environments. Sophos XG is highly regarded for its robust capabilities, user-friendly interface, and extensive defense against harmful threats.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security could benefit from enhancements in the support system, feature additions, data protection visibility, DLP feature, configuration process, integration, documentation, and flexibility. Sophos XG requires improvements in antivirus, graphical interface, performance, logging, support, setup process, configuration, functionality, sales policies, firewall upgrades, network monitoring, content filtering, GDPR features, search engine, stability, user-friendliness, firmware upgrades, and remote access.
Service and Support: Some customers appreciate Check Point's technical support, while others are dissatisfied with the slow response time. Sophos XG's support receives mixed reviews, with some customers finding it helpful and responsive, while others express dissatisfaction with unhelpful and unresponsive assistance.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is described as straightforward and uncomplicated, although some users note that it can be challenging and necessitates technical proficiency. Sophos XG's initial setup is generally considered simple and straightforward, although certain users find it difficult or extremely challenging. The ease of setup is influenced by factors such as familiarity with the product and technical expertise.
Pricing: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is considered costly for setup, whereas Sophos XG provides flexible pricing based on functionality. Check Point's pricing varies with organization size and country, while Sophos offers competitive pricing, particularly for educational institutions.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security offers a cost-effective solution with improved performance, providing an ROI ranging from 80% to 85%. Sophos XG boasts an ROI of 100% or higher, reducing support costs and enhancing security practices.
Comparison Results: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security outperforms Sophos XG. Users find the setup of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security to be simple and intuitive. Check Point offers a wider range of valuable features, including VPN Blade, IPS Blade, URL filtering, and Applications Control Blade, along with advanced threat prevention capabilities and centralized security.
"Advanced routing (RIP, OSPF, BGP, PBR). It gives you a seamless and simple integration into a large network."
"We were looking for the VPN feature and controlling the inflow and outflow of all the traffic within the site and across the sites. We are also using it for the VPN and VLANs."
"Anti-Spam web content filterinG."
"It works very well. It has a lot of different functionalities. Its cost is also fine for our customers."
"It's user-friendly and easy to operate."
"LinkGreat firewall capabilities"
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is good to use, and most importantly, the pricing. The customer especially likes the discount when they trade up or something like that."
"Provides good firewall security and has great VPN features."
"It's possible to sync the Check Point Management with the cloud portal, therefore allowing automated rules to be set in place whenever creating a new VM."
"The multiple virtual firewalls on one box are extremely useful and the interconnection with virtual switches is simple and easy to understand."
"Identity awareness, URL filtering, IDS, DLP, Content Filtering, VPN, and Application Control are all excellent."
"Now, we can filter which websites users can access and block categories that are a risk. For example, we can block social media and gambling sites. This has helped to decrease the risk of access to malicious content on the internet."
"The product gives analytic reports."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its management console."
"Check Point CloudGuard is quick to deploy and easy for the customer to use."
"What's most valuable to me is that it's a contiguous solution that aligns well with the components that we've relied on and trusted from a traditional hardware, firewall, and unified threat management system. My engineers and analysts don't have to learn another platform. We have already entrusted our security controls to Check Point for perimeter and physical security, and now we can do so at the virtual layer as well, which is key to us."
"We are able to trace any user and pinpoint any vulnerability or any malicious software. We are able to synchronize between the local and active directories so we can catch users easily through their login names and IDs."
"Sophos offers great disk encryption, anti protection, and the interface is very user-friendly."
"It is stable, flexible, and easy to use. It has got a web management portal that can be accessed from anywhere."
"It is feature-rich, I like the server authentication, and the reports are good."
"It's a product that is in continuous improvement and is following what the customer is asking for. They are taking inputs and designing new releases specifically according to the client and their needs."
"One of the most valuable features is the VPN."
"If you want to install antivirus and firewalling on endpoints, then Sophos is the best option."
"I rate Sophos support 10 out of 10. When my device was freezing, I contacted them, and sent me a replacement. It only took a couple of days for Sophos to ship the device to Kenya. I didn't have a redundant device, so it was urgent."
"Its customer service could be better."
"They can do more tests before they release new versions because I would like to be more assured. We had some experiences where they release something new and great, but some of the old features are disabled or they don't work well, which impacts the product satisfaction. The manufacturer should be able to prove that everything works or not only that it might work. This is applicable to most of the other services, software, and hardware companies. They all should work on this. We cannot trust every new release, such as a beta release, on the first day. We wait for some comments on the forums and from other companies that we know. We always wait a few weeks before we use the updated version. They should also extend the VPN client application, especially for Linux versions. Currently, it has an application for Linux devices, but it doesn't work the way we want to connect to the VPN. They use only the old connection, not the new one. They have VPN client applications for Windows and Mac, but they can add more useful features to better manage the devices and monitor the current health of each device. Such features would be helpful for our company."
"I think there could be more QoS features"
"Difficult to add or define, and not that easy to configure and manage."
"The renewal price and the availability could be improved."
"There can be more security in hybrid implementations. When a customer has a hybrid environment where some parts are in the cloud, we need a consistent security solution for such scenarios."
"Tunnel flapping was one of the major things I had seen wherein your internet link remains but your VPN tunnel is down. However, since I got a fix from the TAC team, I have not noticed it, but the customer complained a few times that they couldn't access the internet because of this problem."
"Fortigate's hardware capacities could be improved."
"The product can still grow."
"We miss full blade support for all blades that are compatible with the cluster. Especially notable is the lack of support for Identity Awareness in active standby environments for customers. In our setup, transitioning to Connective clusters would be preferable for maintaining connections during failover situations."
"The connection to the on-premises management requires using the CLI. It's not just a click, and you cannot edit in the management to prepare everything. You need to do it online and in real time. After that, you must execute a script, and then you should be happy that it appears in the management."
"They are coming out with more SD-WAN express route support from a firewall perspective. That would be great."
"There is room for improvement, especially concerning the integration with the management center. It would be beneficial if tasks that currently require scripts could be performed directly from the GUI."
"The management console can be simplified because at the moment, it is a bit of a challenge to use."
"Check Point could show us use cases that would help us in Czech and could help us with security threats in our specific country."
"We have Microsoft CASB cloud app security and it's one of the least compatible firewalls. They really need to look at this, as both Check Point and Microsoft are major players. Why aren't they compatible? If we had Palo Alto then we wouldn't have this problem."
"The interface can bit a bit more user-friendly."
"Their updates can be faster and more regular."
"An area of improvement would be the reporting as diagnostic graphs take a long time to load and refresh. If there could be an option to show only select graphs, it may speed up the graphics."
"The current bandwidth consumption is no longer shown in the XG and XGS."
"Sophos XG could improve the policies, they are a bit confusing when creating them. There are many options that make it confusing and it could be simplified."
"Some of the firewall rules are complicated for us to understand, they should be simplified."
"I would like to next release to be able to support on-premise deployment. The construction of the rules within the firewall could also use some improvement."
"The UI needs improvement because it can be a little weird at times."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 121 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "Highly reliable, great visibility, and centralized management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Firewall and Fortinet FortiGate-VM, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos XGS, SonicWall TZ and Meraki MX. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Sophos XG 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.
