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

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention 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)
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Palo Alto Networks Advanced...
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is 4.2%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is 7.5%, down from 8.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

Yosevan Sinaga Sinaga - PeerSpot reviewer
Effectively identifies malicious behavior while future automation and AI advancements hold potential
Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) ( /products/cisco-secure-ips-ngips-reviews ) is quite powerful for threat detection and includes botnet detection. It effectively blocks unwanted software, hashes, and suspicious behaviors. The tool is easy to integrate with other IT security solutions due to similar protocols. The system offers effective threat detection features, although automation capabilities are not yet fully utilized.
Carlos Bracamonte - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust, reliable, simple to install and good technical support
We are attempting to improve the use of URL filtering beyond threat protection. I'm not sure what the remaining threat protection features are off the top of my head. But beyond that, we use URL filtering. We have three approved cases for using external dynamic lists that are stored in a bucket repository. Then, for each URL site that needs to be whitelisted, we add it to the external dynamic list in order to gain access to this email. I would like Wildfire to be implemented. We use the equivalent in Cisco is the integration policies. We have the Wildfire but we are not currently implementing it. We don't have the license to use it, but we are not currently implementing it until we present the use cases that the company gives some value to and they approve the use of it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution has helped improve productivity and detect attacks before they happen."
"I like the security solutions from Cisco."
"I configured the system myself and the process was okay."
"You can do zero-day prevention and detection. It's quite useful."
"It has helped to improve our cybersecurity and our network security posture."
"Its ease of use and its ability to block and allow ports in and out of our organization are the most valuable features. It works very well. It gives us all the information that we need."
"Cisco NGIPS is working well overall with our current needs."
"NGIPS' best feature is the separate IPSec tunnels, which makes the user's data more secure if they want to access it privately."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It's quite easy. Deployment took one to two weeks."
"It effectively prevents malware, ransomware, and other attacks."
"One of the most valuable features is the anti-malware protection."
"The application control and vulnerability protection are the most valuable features."
"It's a monster, it's got so many beautiful features. We do deal with other firewalls and we've got a better idea of what other firewalls' capabilities are, any comparison with the Palo Alto I liked the quality of service on the applications that you can control the amount of bandwidth an application is allowed to consume. The best feature is the quality of the application quality of service."
"For those who want a next-gen firewall that's easy to configure and easy to operate, I think you should go for Palo Alto."
"The most valuable features are that it's user-friendly, has interesting features, URL filtering, and threat prevention."
"The most valuable feature is its use of machine learning to detect potentially unknown threats."
 

Cons

"The price is a little high. It's hard to find solutions that are easy on the budget and strike a balance between affordability and features."
"While the Management GUI and FMC could be improved, the devices themselves function well."
"What I don't like about Cisco recently is they keep changing the names, which makes it hard for customers and sometimes even us as engineers to know what is the solution they are speaking about. For example, with AMP, now they call it Secure Endpoint and I don't know if in the next couple of years they're going to change it to something else. They should keep the names the same."
"I would rate Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) six out of ten. The lack of automation and AI capabilities affects the rating."
"There are certain limitations that need to be addressed."
"Multi-internet line load balancing should be supported."
"NGIPS' GUI interface could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"Better integration with other products, such as a SIEM tool, would provide better peer visibility about your security posture."
"The installation was complicated."
"Right now we are focusing on email. If Palo Alto can increase the features related to email filtering and the new malware, it would help us protect our systems."
"The documentation needs to be improved. I need better information about how to configure it and what the best practices are."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"The technology firewall anomaly network could stand improvement."
"The application’s pricing and dashboard need improvement. It could be user-friendly."
"I think they can use some improvement on FID."
"The solution could benefit from improved AI analytics to predict potential attacks before they occur, similar to NDR systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It could be less expensive."
"The price of Cisco NGIPS could be reduced. It is more expensive than other solutions."
"When it comes to pricing you pay for a permanent licensing structure. One, three, and five-year options. There are no extra costs."
"Licensing fees for this solution are $3,500 USD, and there are no additional costs."
"The pricing could be improved. Our customers have a yearly license."
"They are very expensive in some places and not reasonable at times for many customers. I have had customers choose another solution because of the high price."
"We pay for the IPS license to use this solution."
"The price of the solution is expensive to a degree it cannot be used by small businesses. It is best suited for medium and enterprise businesses."
"Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is quite competitive, offering extensive threat detection and prevention capabilities, though it is priced higher than some alternatives."
"The pricing and the licensing are pretty competitive at this stage. As a reseller, I would like to see the price come down a little bit so I can compete better against other firewalls because we do that all the time."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"There is an initial, expensive investment but the return is good."
"If you want to have all of the good features then you have to pay extra for licensing."
"From one to ten, with one being the most expensive, I would rate the pricing of Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention a one out of ten. It is my understanding that Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is the most expensive one."
"The price of the solution is higher than others on the market. A price reduction would be beneficial if it does not impact their database quality."
"It's not too expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
842,466 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
University
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Educational Organization
8%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco NGIPS?
The product's initial setup phase was easy.
What needs improvement with Cisco NGIPS?
The dashboard is quite old compared to today's technology. We would like to see improvements in the dashboard features.
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention?
The pricing is competitive, and with current campaigns and discounts, it provides an excellent device for a reasonable price.
 

Also Known As

Sourcefire NGIPS, Firepower NGIPS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

American Electric Power, Huntington Bank, Keycorp, Nationwide, Transunion, Marriott, Inova Health, Ford, Thomson Reuters, Dow Chemical, Equifax, Chevron, Walmart, Coca Cola
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, SkiStar AB, TRI-AD, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,466 professionals have used our research since 2012.