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

Check Point NGFW vs Sophos XG comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 5, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.3
Fortinet FortiGate offers cost-effective and efficient security with quick ROI, reducing expenses in data communication and management.
Sentiment score
7.5
Check Point NGFW provides cost-effective security, consolidating tools for reduced costs, minimized downtime, and enhanced productivity, ensuring user satisfaction.
Sentiment score
7.1
Sophos XG offers strong ROI through cost savings, enhanced security, and efficiency, despite being slightly more expensive.
Clients are now comfortable and not wasting productive hours on IT support.
We have experienced a positive return on investment by utilizing Fortinet's products.
There's definitely an ROI. Having a centralized way of managing and applying policies across the entire organization always helps.
It's good, but I would still say it's higher by about 10-15 percent compared to other market products with similar configurations.
Having a Unified Threat Management system like Sophos XG has helped us spend less on network security, thus providing a good return on investment by managing our income effectively.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
Fortinet FortiGate's customer service is praised for problem-solving but criticized for inconsistent response times and language barriers.
Sentiment score
7.1
Customer service for Check Point NGFW is inconsistent, with variances in responsiveness and effectiveness across regions and support models.
Sentiment score
6.1
Sophos XG support is mixed, with varying expertise and response times, though local distributor support is valued.
He explained that it required a command line configuration, as it couldn't be done through the graphical user interface.
I would rate their support for FortiGate a nine out of ten.
They offer very accurate solutions.
The support team we engaged was knowledgeable and well-versed with the application.
I rate technical support from Check Point at ten out of ten.
When I can't resolve an issue technically, I consult with a senior engineer.
Users are reluctant to open support cases and would rather reinstall an appliance themselves than go through the support process.
I would rate the technical support a nine out of ten.
Microsoft's protection has received positive feedback and strong on-site support from both customers and partners.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Fortinet FortiGate is scalable, flexible, and adaptable, though some face hardware upgrades and licensing challenges during deployment sizes.
Sentiment score
7.6
Check Point NGFW offers high scalability and hyperscaling with Maestro, suitable for cloud and on-premise enterprise environments.
Sentiment score
7.2
Sophos XG is scalable but larger organizations may need hardware upgrades; suitable for small to medium enterprises with planning.
They scale up really well from smaller models like the FortiGate 40 and 50 to bigger sites with the FortiGate 100 for more throughput - up to enterprise datacenters.
The processor, the microprocessor and the security processors are very intelligent so they can scale significantly and manage that well.
There are many options available, and we can choose the size of the box based on our requirements.
Scalability must be carefully planned for, considering future growth and user base increases.
It enhances performance with high availability, shifting to a secondary firewall if one fails.
You can scale up to multiple firewalls with centralized management.
You can't upgrade memory or storage on a specific model, which limits scalability.
The scalability of the solution is limited to three nodes and may not be sufficient for extensive scaling.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
Fortinet FortiGate is praised for its stability and reliability, with occasional issues improved by updates and configurations.
Sentiment score
7.6
Check Point NGFW is reliable with improved stability in newer versions, though some users report occasional connectivity issues.
Sentiment score
8.0
Sophos XG is praised for its reliability and stable performance, with effective support and occasional firmware update concerns.
There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze.
Improper handling of these can lead to a memory surge, a well-known bug that can cause the entire system to freeze.
It is less stable than Palo Alto Networks and Check Point firewalls because there are lots of bugs in the latest firmware.
While the solution is generally stable, there are complications, such as requiring SmartConsole for deployment and upgrades, which can be time-consuming.
I would rate the stability of Sophos XG a ten out of ten.
The firewall fails to unblock sites without requiring a restart to save and execute the changes properly.
The solution is stable, and we rarely encounter glitches.
 

Room For Improvement

Fortinet FortiGate needs improvements in stability, usability, integration, cost-effectiveness, and documentation for enhanced user satisfaction and performance.
Check Point NGFW needs better stability, third-party integration, user interface, support, and improvements in antivirus, VPN, and licensing.
Sophos XG needs an improved interface, better VPN stability, enhanced support, and more detailed security and licensing transparency.
If I have put 10 GBPS of throughput on a firewall and I enable all of these features available, such as IPS or UTM functionalities, the throughput comes down to 1 GBPS.
By providing an integrated solution, users would have access to all features and functionalities within a single window, eliminating the need to navigate through multiple windows.
Investing in a solution that can accommodate such growth would be more cost-effective than repeatedly purchasing new hardware.
Check Point would benefit from having a single console for both basic and policy configurations.
The graphical user interface (GUI) could benefit from some updates.
In the rule creation process, we need to decide on the source address, destination address, and services.
The solution should have the ability to be up to date with the most recent threats.
This suggests a vulnerability that needs addressing to ensure administrators can update patches without losing access.
Business cannot stop just because of issues with support.
 

Setup Cost

Fortinet FortiGate offers competitive pricing with varied costs; affordable long-term licenses, though renewal complexity can accumulate costs.
Check Point NGFW offers robust security with a complex, negotiable pricing model, often seen as costly but competitive.
Sophos XG offers competitive pricing, appealing to small and medium enterprises, and is often cheaper than rivals like FortiGate.
Secure SD-WAN is free of charge.
The most expensive part is the renewal of the license subscription.
FortiGate is priced lower than Palo Alto.
In comparison to Fortinet and other products, the pricing may be considered high.
We found the pricing reasonable, ensuring the product was not overpriced.
I would rate the pricing a ten out of ten as high.
The licensing cost in the final currency amount, is 163,080, with three years of support.
I rate the pricing a ten out of ten.
 

Valuable Features

Fortinet FortiGate offers advanced security features, user-friendly configuration, and comprehensive management tools, valued for robust protection and flexibility.
Check Point NGFW provides centralized management, robust security features, and flexible integration, ensuring comprehensive protection against diverse threats efficiently.
Sophos XG delivers advanced security, scalability, and user-friendly management for medium enterprises with comprehensive network activity views.
Fortigate blocks unusual traffic and therefore secures our network.
It's easy to monitor the end-to-end network through the firewall.
The firewall, IPS, and VPN functions are the most valuable features.
The firewall's default behavior of blocking all traffic, including a cleanup rule that blocks everything from external to internal sources, is highly valuable for protecting our network.
In the normal GA login, I can create interfaces and configure interface IPs, while in the SmartConsole, I manage the NAT quality and firewall access.
One of the most valuable features is the ability to whitelist and blacklist sources to control access to our ecosystem, ensuring secured SaaS application access.
This unique technology provides efficient branch connectivity without the need to invest in additional firewalls for each branch.
I particularly like the visibility it provides into network traffic, allowing us to identify and address issues efficiently.
The firewall feature of Sophos XG has been the most effective for threat prevention.
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortinet FortiGate
Sponsored
Ranking in Firewalls
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
317
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (1st), WAN Edge (1st)
Check Point NGFW
Ranking in Firewalls
6th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
306
Ranking in other categories
Unified Threat Management (UTM) (1st)
Sophos XG
Ranking in Firewalls
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
198
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Firewalls category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiGate is 20.3%, up from 17.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point NGFW is 3.1%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sophos XG is 11.5%, up from 9.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewalls
 

Featured Reviews

EhabAli - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient, user-friendly, and affordable
In the past, NSS Labs was utilized to test files and verify the numbers and datasheets. It would be beneficial to have an organization or testing lab that can verify the numbers in our datasheets since changes are frequently made, which can be inconvenient for review. For instance, when comparing different competitors such as Forcepoint, Palo Alto, and Check Point, the throughput or numbers in the datasheet may be lower than the actual numbers. Conversely, Fortinet typically reports very high numbers, but they cannot be replicated in the real world. Therefore, it would be advantageous for them to partner with a neutral testing organization such as NSS Labs to validate these numbers, thus providing more credibility and comfort to everyone regarding the accuracy of the datasheets. For the migration, everyone has a firewall in use and I am selling Fortinet. Typically, I am replacing another firewall. Previously, there was a tool available to convert configurations from one firewall, such as Palo Alto, to Fortinet, but this tool is no longer free. If it could be made free again, it would be very beneficial. This tool shows a lot of promise and is very good. Making it free would help many companies deliver their products in a more efficient and integrated way. It would also be more valuable to include the tool with the firewall package or license instead of having to pay extra for it. Paying extra puts more pressure on small companies to deliver the firewall and complete the configuration, especially if they have hundreds or thousands of policies. It's very painful to move through these policies line by line. The stability has room for improvement. When it comes to Secure SD-WAN, everything is fine. They are going the right way. SD-WAN is very promising. They can provide the SD-WAN solution separately, but they will not take this approach because even the smallest firewall can support the features, so there is no need to have a separate service or appliance. They are following the right steps, and there is nothing to be improved. Feature-wise, I'm really satisfied with the new release, and the features they have added. For now, it's fine.
Manikandan Kannan - PeerSpot reviewer
Streamlined management through dual-interface configuration capabilities with excellent support
We use Check Point NGFW for security purposes. Our clients use it for security reasons, as mentioned during the call The most valuable feature is the availability of two consoles. In the normal GA login, I can create interfaces and configure interface IPs, while in the SmartConsole, I manage the…
SherifFouad - PeerSpot reviewer
Gives us customizable policies, modifiable templates, and customized rules for single users
The major problem that I am facing, and I know that others are facing as well, is with the HTTPS classic, in general, or any classic that works on Secure Socket Layers. Let's say I set up a rule to block users from accessing YouTube or Facebook. The rule will only block the HTTP traffic, which is non-secure traffic. But most websites right now, most of the reputable web services providers, for extra security for their own web servers and for the user's security, provide a connection over Secure Socket Layer. The problem comes when you are trying to block, or allow, similar traffic that uses HTTPS. You have to create a certificate and import it into the users' web browsers, whatever they are using. Now, this is not a problem when you're dealing with users stationed and fixed in a specific site or location. They are using desktops, they will never take the desktops and go home with them, nor will they ever take the desktops and travel to another country, or another site with it. The problem occurs when you're dealing with roaming users who use laptops and have to move between different sites that have different types of policies applied to them. You have to import all sorts of certificates from each site into their browser. Doing so will most probably conflict with something else that is totally irrelevant and cause a problem. A way around this is if you are using authentication with Active Directory. But most of the time, especially if you're operating in a remote site with a very slow internet connection, if it's available in the first place, authentication with Active Directory is impossible. So it needs an easier way to apply HTTPS filters, without importing certificates into users' browsers and without the need for using an Active Directory. There must be a way around it. There are workarounds. But with applied workarounds, it will work out once, it won't work out properly 10 other times. That is my only request. Also, since Sophos took over Cyberoam, the online technical library and support library have become super messy. To get a piece of information is becoming a nightmare. They need to reorganize the online technical support and technical library. The easiest way to overcome this is to look at how the Cyberoam online technical library was structured and to build the Sophos technical library the same way. It is messy, totally unorganized, time-wasting. Instead of getting what you want in five minutes it takes half an hour.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
831,020 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
22%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Educational Organization
58%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
4%
Government
3%
Computer Software Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the better NGFW: Fortinet Fortigate or Cisco Firepower?
When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage a...
What is the biggest difference between Sophos XG and FortiGate?
From my experience regarding both the Sophos and FortiGate firewalls, I personally would rather use FortiGate. I know...
What are the biggest technical differences between Sophos UTM and Fortinet FortiGate?
As a solution, Sophos UTM offers a lot of functionality, it scales well, and the stability and performance are quite ...
How does Check Point NGFW compare with Fortinet Fortigate?
I have experience on both from Disti and channel experience. Please find below my comments (nothing new as such). -Ch...
Which would you recommend - Azure Firewall or Check Point NGFW?
Azure Firewall is easy to use and provides excellent support. Valuable features include integration into the overall ...
What do you like most about Check Point NGFW?
Check Point NGFW provides essential security, featuring no-obligation access for secure connections, strong intrusion...
Which is better - Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls or Sophos XG?
Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls have both great features and performance. I like that Palo Alto has regular threat si...
What are the main differences in features between Sophos XG and FortiGate 80F?
Hi Arvind P , The Sophos XG firewall has a number of models right from XG86 to XG135w under the 1U Desktop Form Fact...
What Is The Biggest Difference Between Sophos UTM and Sophos XG?
The Sophos UTM is a UTM and Sophos XG is the NGFW. First, you must know about the difference between a UTM and NGFW. ...
 

Also Known As

FortiGate 60b, FortiGate 60c, FortiGate 80c, FortiGate 50b, FortiGate 200b, FortiGate 110c, FortiGate, Fortinet Firewall
Check Point NG Firewall, Check Point Next Generation Firewall
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, IBM, Cisco, Dell, HP, Oracle, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Vodafone, Orange, BT Group, Telstra, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, CenturyLink, NTT Communications, Tata Communications, SoftBank, China Mobile, Singtel, Telus, Rogers Communications, Bell Canada, Telkom Indonesia, Telkom South Africa, Telmex, Telia Company, Telkom Kenya
Control Southern, Optimal Media
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point NGFW vs. Sophos XG and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,020 professionals have used our research since 2012.