No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Hillstone I-Series Server B...
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
26th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (24th), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is 3.3%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System is 1.1%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)3.3%
Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System1.1%
Other95.6%
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer373227 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Marketing strengths shine but regaining user trust needs significant effort
There are numerous things that could be improved about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) to get it back on track. Sollution for small branches: when we have to connect a lot very small branches (or sometimes only an ATM) we need something small, with LTE and with reasonable price. Cisco response is SDWAN but it is not always the case. Recently Cisco released some small firewalls but I have not tried them yet. Central management with FMC is a very good idea, but sometimes local management or monitoring is helpfull. With Cisco You have to decide: central or local. You cannot have both. Regarding usability, when you commit configuration on Cisco, it sometimes takes very long. Commits also take some time for the competition, but Cisco is definitely lagging behind the rest in this respect. Last but not least, for me as a professional is lack of CLI. With CLI, I can configure every firewall on the market except Cisco. CLI is very important in professional working, and IMHO it was an unwise decision by Cisco to remove it. Graphical interfaces are very nice, but when you've got thousands of objects in a big installation and have to configure many things, CLI is a much faster way to do it.
DAVI TEIXEIRA - PeerSpot reviewer
Physical Education Professional JR at Unimed
Beneficial AI detection, helpful support, but modern UI needed
The initial setup of the Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System requires a bunch of steps starting with installing the hardware and setting it up. However, most of the setup is done by the vendor. I rate the initial setup of the Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System an eight out of ten. The vendor provides free training in the software provided.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The main benefits Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) provides for us are security, visibility, and cost savings."
"The cost is the most valuable feature."
"We are satisfied with the technical support."
"I think their fingerprints are good in terms of how they whitelist and blacklist."
"The most valuable feature is its IPS ability. You are able to balance security and connectivity."
"You can trust it because of the originality score and with what we've used so far too, I see the difference in the old version and this new one."
"It has increased our security posture and has contributed substantially to our security maturity by stopping threats."
"We have found the IPS detection to be a very valuable feature of this solution. It is easy to use to stop policy violations."
"One or two people can maintain and support the solution. The maintenance is not difficult."
"The most valuable features of the Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System are the AI detection and monitoring of common threats."
"One or two people can maintain and support the solution. The maintenance is not difficult."
 

Cons

"I would like to see a more user-friendly interface."
"The inclusion of bandwidth management features would improve this product."
"The pricing is very expensive. They should make their equipment more affordable."
"There is room for improvement in the policy documentation."
"The aspect of private party integration solutions could be improved."
"I don't recommend Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) unless the network infrastructure is predominantly Cisco."
"Regarding additional features, they should speed up their technology to the market because, compared with other security vendors, Cisco is a little behind on the Gartner and technical front."
"As it is now, I cannot say that I am 80% secure against my applications being attacked."
"Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System can improve by having more anti-spam features that will hopefully eliminate all of the other threats."
"The UI dashboard view needs to be improved because it is ugly. If it was more modern it would be better. Additionally, better integration with other databases would be good."
"Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System can improve by having more anti-spam features that will hopefully eliminate all of the other threats."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is pricey, but worth it."
"Licenses for this product are available for either one, or three year terms."
"This is a very affordable product."
"We get cut in price since we use other Cisco products. We have the whole bundle of Cisco solutions."
"I would rate the pricing 4 out of 5."
"There are licensing fees depending on the features that you are using."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
"Licensing fees for this solution are $3,500 USD, and there are no additional costs."
"The price of the solution is good. It is less expensive than the other solutions in the market. There are not any additional features or hidden costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
885,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise27
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco NGIPS?
I would rate the price for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) as high.
What needs improvement with Cisco NGIPS?
I am aware that we are not measuring some metrics or tracking access through Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS). In my opinion, Cisco could improve the Web GUI for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS).
What is your primary use case for Cisco NGIPS?
Our main use case for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is in-line traffic control, and we are using IPS in an in-line mode.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Sourcefire NGIPS, Firepower NGIPS
Hillstone sBDS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

American Electric Power, Huntington Bank, Keycorp, Nationwide, Transunion, Marriott, Inova Health, Ford, Thomson Reuters, Dow Chemical, Equifax, Chevron, Walmart, Coca Cola
Norbert Wiener University, Regional Government of the Amazon
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs. Hillstone I-Series Server Breach Detection System and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.