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
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
66
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 December 2024, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is 4.2%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is 7.0%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

YoussefBoukari - PeerSpot reviewer
Very effective for malware and signature-based anomalies but stability needs improvement
Our company uses the solution for data functions in banking. It is a backend solution in the server center.  We analyze traffic and adapt configurations or customize policies to the environment of the IPS itself.  The solution very effectively provides malware protection and signature-based…
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

"The initial setup wasn't complex or complicated."
"The most valuable features of Cisco NGIPS are protection and reporting."
"The security intelligence in the product is the best feature and give us all the information that we need in our network."
"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."
"It has good intelligence. It does a great job at stopping threats."
"This solution has helped improve productivity and detect attacks before they happen."
"The URL filtering feature and the new locations feature are both valuable additions to the solution."
"It has helped to improve our cybersecurity and our network security posture."
"Everything has been okay with the solution. We are using all of the features."
"The application control and vulnerability protection are the most valuable features."
"The stability of Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is good."
"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 user interface is a bit more professional than some free products."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Threat Prevention for our company is the next generation firewall."
"The sandboxing tools offer great prevention for cloud feeds."
"The most valuable feature is its use of machine learning to detect potentially unknown threats."
 

Cons

"The CLI, the console line interface, of the FTD could be improved. It's very complex, so without a GUI, it doesn't work well. I would like it to be more simple."
"The look and feel of the console could be updated."
"I would like to see better integration with SIEMs."
"We don't like its licensing model. It has separate licensing for all the features. For instance, to get URL filtering, you need to buy another license. Every feature set seems to require another license. Unless you purchase them all upfront, you find some surprises and realize that you can't do that because you need another license. Its logging isn't quite as good as it used to be in our previous solution. We used to have Cisco ASA, and we could view the logs a lot easier than NGIPS (also known as Firepower). We saw real-time logging, but we don't see that as much in Firepower."
"I'd like to see some cloud management. Cisco maybe already has it, however, my company doesn't use it as cloud management."
"In the next release I would like to see better reporting. I also find it's hard to act on the data it gives you."
"There are certain limitations that need to be addressed."
"The pricing is very expensive. They should make their equipment more affordable."
"It's not so easy to set up a test environment, because it's not so easy to get the test license. The vendor only gives you 90 days for a test license; it's a tough license to get."
"The technology firewall anomaly network could stand improvement."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention could improve the commercial offing. Other solutions, such as Fortinet provide better commercial features."
"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower. In comparison with other solutions, I believe they're quite competitive."
"In Africa, the technical support is probably not as good as in Europe and the USA because it's a specific premium support, partner-enabled premium support and all of that. But it's really good, I don't really have any complaints, it's fairly good. I'll give them 80%."
"The organization mail security solutions could be improved. There is no mail security solution available."
"The solution needs to improve its local technical support services. There is no premium support offered in our market."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of the license depends on the level of support that you have with Cisco."
"The annual licensing tends to be expensive, but in terms of implementing the licenses, it's a very uncomplicated process and as easy as copy-paste in its straightforwardness."
"I would rate the pricing four out of 10."
"In our company, we know that the price of Cisco products is high, especially for its switches, routers and IOS. The price of Cisco products may be twice its original price if you plan to extend some of its features."
"The solution is pricey, but worth it."
"Cisco products are always expensive, but if you can afford the price then it's a great 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."
"The pricing could be improved. Our customers have a yearly license."
"The product’s pricing is expensive for small companies."
"It is an expensive solution and I would like to see a drop in price."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"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 pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower."
"There is an initial, expensive investment but the return is good."
"Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is quite competitive, offering extensive threat detection and prevention capabilities, though it is priced higher than some alternatives."
"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.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
University
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Educational Organization
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

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: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.