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

Cisco Secure Firewall vs Sophos XG comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 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
7.4
Fortinet FortiGate offers cost-effective security and performance improvements, boosting user productivity and reducing operational costs.
Sentiment score
5.8
Cisco Secure Firewall offers ROI through reliability, preventing costly incidents, improving efficiency, and easy integration despite ROI quantification challenges.
Sentiment score
7.4
Sophos XG boosts security, reduces costs, improves efficiency, and enhances compliance, despite slightly higher initial expenses.
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.
My customers see a return on investment and value for money with Sophos XG.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
Fortinet FortiGate's support varies; praised for responsiveness but criticized for delays, with location impacting experiences and documentation praised.
Sentiment score
6.4
Cisco Secure Firewall users praise efficient customer service but note occasional inconsistency; direct contracts improve support quality.
Sentiment score
6.3
Sophos XG customer service is mixed; praised for professionalism but criticized for slow responses and inconsistent support.
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.
I have to provide many logs, yet problems remain unresolved, often requiring workarounds rather than solutions.
I have been working with them on firewalls, wireless, switching, and routing, and the support is the best.
If I have a priority one case, I am able to call the manager to raise the severity.
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 and flexible, but may require hardware changes and face integration issues with other vendors.
Sentiment score
6.6
Cisco Secure Firewall is scalable and flexible for businesses, but costs and hardware vary, requiring careful needs assessment.
Sentiment score
7.3
Sophos XG offers scalability and flexibility for varying user bases though large enterprises may require hardware upgrades.
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 variation comes in terms of the interfaces and throughputs, but from a security perspective, you get the same benefit, irrespective of whether you have an entry-level unit or an enterprise.
You can choose a cheaper model if you only have 20-30 users, but you will need to spend more money for a FortiGate solution that covers 5,000.
Scalability presents a challenge.
Compared to FortiGate and Palo Alto, it lags in configuration and other aspects.
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 generally stable and reliable, though firmware updates and resource intensity may temporarily affect performance.
Sentiment score
8.9
Cisco Secure Firewall is praised for stability, reliability, minimal issues, rapid updates for bugs, and exceptional performance under pressure.
Sentiment score
7.9
Sophos XG is generally reliable, with prompt support resolving minor issues and firmware updates improving stability and performance.
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.
We have not had any problems with the operating systems or maintenance of subscriptions.
Cisco Secure Firewall offers exceptional performance and stability.
I would rate the stability of Sophos XG a ten out of ten.
Sophos XG is very stable, even when serving as a DHCP server.
Sophos XG is resource-greedy, affecting performance even on newer computers.
 

Room For Improvement

Fortinet FortiGate needs enhancements in stability, interface, pricing, VPN performance, third-party integration, and technical support.
Cisco Secure Firewall users seek improvements in routing support, cost efficiency, UI design, integration, and performance enhancements.
Sophos XG users seek improvements in support, usability, security, integration, VPN performance, AI features, and pricing for budget-conscious organizations.
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.
Firepower Management Center is quite out of date compared to other vendors.
The integration between Cisco products themselves presents difficulties, such as SD-WAN configuration.
Cisco Firewalls require FMC for management.
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 is cost-effective, offers flexible licensing, and includes most features with straightforward pricing despite some high renewal costs.
Cisco Secure Firewall is costly but valued for performance, support, and discounts, appealing to security-focused enterprises.
Sophos XG offers competitive pricing with flexible options and discounts, with costs influenced by features and contract duration.
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.
It's considered a premium, but people pay that price for Cisco.
The licensing process for Cisco Secure Firewall is convoluted, involving many steps to request and enter a license key.
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 robust security and management features, valued for ease of use, cost-effectiveness, and consistent performance.
Cisco Secure Firewall offers robust security, easy management, and integration with high availability, scalability, and centralized policy creation.
Sophos XG delivers robust security features, user-friendly management, seamless VPN, and enhanced network visibility for efficient remote work.
The firewall, IPS, and VPN functions are the most valuable features.
FortiGate provides solid protection against viruses, malware, and other threats.
Within the same dashboard, you get to see the security profiles, the type of traffic that's passing through, the top applications that are being consumed, etc.
It includes features like IPS, malware protection, and other security features.
Cisco Firewall has very good features, like trusted applications and restricted access for users based on keywords.
The most valuable features of Cisco Secure Firewall include the next-generation firewall and its strong anti-malware capabilities.
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
328
Ranking in other categories
Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (1st), WAN Edge (1st)
Cisco Secure Firewall
Ranking in Firewalls
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
411
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (4th)
Sophos XG
Ranking in Firewalls
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
203
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Firewalls category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiGate is 21.1%, up from 17.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Firewall is 5.8%, up from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sophos XG is 11.5%, up from 9.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewalls
 

Q&A Highlights

Steve Chiyenda - PeerSpot reviewer
May 20, 2022
 

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.
Maharajan S - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhances security with precise access control but has integration challenges
Overall, I would rate the product six out of ten. Because of the support and cost, I moved away from Cisco, but otherwise, it is a good product. Recommendation depends on the requirement. If lacking a proper team and being dependent on the OEM and partner, Cisco is not suitable. However, if the team is qualified with Cisco-certified people and the requirement is a big network, it can be considered. In today's hybrid work world, having an expanded gateway is more typical than having a single one. Thus, Cisco is unlikely to be recommended for a hybrid requirement unless in-house skills align. Otherwise, depending on partners and Cisco, it can be a risk. I rate the overall solution six out of ten.
Mohamad Charara - PeerSpot reviewer
Security features improve protection while integration and resource management require enhancements
Sophos XG ( /products/sophos-xg-reviews ) is not easy to navigate and to use, and the integration capabilities are lacking. It cannot integrate properly with solutions like Darktrace ( /products/darktrace-reviews ). The VPN client on mobiles, especially Android phones, has issues. It is resource-greedy, causing performance problems even on new computers. Improvements are needed in resource management and integration with other security solutions.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
848,396 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 11, 2015
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto Networks
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto: Management Goodies You often have comparisons of both firewalls concerning security components. Of course, a firewall must block attacks, scan for viruses, build VPNs, etc. However, in this post I am discussing the advantages and disadvantages from both vendors concerning…
 

Answers from the Community

Steve Chiyenda - PeerSpot reviewer
May 20, 2022
May 20, 2022
My preference is the Sophos XGS, particularly when you team it up with the Sophos Endpoint Protection client and configure it for synchronized security. Both can be managed through Sophos Central and are available at a decent price for the power they offer the SMB.
2 out of 3 answers
Bennett Gomonda - PeerSpot reviewer
May 18, 2022
I prefer Sophos. I find it easy to use and it has better features on malware and threat management.
Carlos Roberto Da Silva - PeerSpot reviewer
May 19, 2022
I recommend Sophos XGS firewall. It will offer the best solution for malware protection.  Also, I recomend Sophos CIXA with XDR (Sophos Endpoint), so you can use Syncronized Security.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
21%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Educational Organization
41%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
4%
Government
4%
Computer Software Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
9%
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 ...
Which is better - Fortinet FortiGate or Cisco ASA Firewall?
One of our favorite things about Fortinet Fortigate is that you can deploy on the cloud or on premises. Fortinet Fort...
How does Cisco's ASA firewall compare with the Firepower NGFW?
It is easy to integrate Cisco ASA with other Cisco products and also other NAC solutions. When you understand the Cis...
Which is better - Meraki MX or Cisco ASA Firewall?
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) software is the operating software for the Cisco ASA suite. It supports netw...
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...
 

Also Known As

FortiGate 60b, FortiGate 60c, FortiGate 80c, FortiGate 50b, FortiGate 200b, FortiGate 110c, FortiGate, Fortinet Firewall
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Adaptive Security Appliance, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv, Cisco Firepower NGFW 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
There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Sophos XG and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,396 professionals have used our research since 2012.