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

Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline vs Palo Alto Networks WildFire comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 1, 2024

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
8.5
Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline boosts productivity and efficiency through reduced troubleshooting, improved security visibility, and optimized resource management.
Sentiment score
7.5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire reduces costs and streamlines threat management with efficient detection and seamless firewall integration.
The service generates a low rate of false positives, reducing the overhead of managing false positive events.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.5
Customer service for Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline is mixed, with some praising it while others find it lacking in direct assistance.
Sentiment score
7.6
Palo Alto Networks WildFire customer service is praised for expertise but varies in responsiveness, with challenges in smaller regions.
There is a lack of SLA adherence, and third-party partners do not provide prompt responses.
The service response times are aligned with standards, responding within a few hours based on the problem's criticality.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline scales well in cloud environments but may face challenges with on-premise scalability and outdated hardware.
Sentiment score
8.1
Palo Alto Networks WildFire offers scalable, customizable, and flexible solutions efficiently accommodating growth, highly rated by larger enterprises.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
Users consistently rate Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline highly for its stability, with minimal issues reported over a year of use.
Sentiment score
8.4
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is highly stable, seamlessly integrates, and is reliable with minimal issues and exceptional cloud performance.
 

Room For Improvement

Gigamon needs better security, traffic inspection, improved GUI, increased capacity, better filtering, and easier cloud setup, with faster hardware delivery.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire needs UI, pricing, deployment, integration, offline capabilities, support, and feature improvements for better user satisfaction.
The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings.
 

Setup Cost

<p>Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline's pricing is considered high but varies by equipment needs, with competitive alternatives available.</p>
Palo Alto Networks WildFire, perceived as costly yet advanced, targets enterprises, offering a 30-day trial and complex pricing.
I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of affordability.
 

Valuable Features

Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline improves firewall performance and enhances network traffic analysis with features like deduplication and encryption.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire excels in real-time threat analysis, malware detection, easy integration, and improved network visibility with machine learning.
The most valuable feature of Wildfire is its sandboxing capability for examining suspicious files or locations.
 

Categories and Ranking

Gigamon Deep Observability ...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
21st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (23rd), Event Monitoring (9th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (16th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (26th), Web Application Firewall (WAF) (19th), Network Packet Broker (NPB) (1st), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (11th)
Palo Alto Networks WildFire
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline is 0.4%. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is 12.5%, up from 12.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

LeonardoAlves - PeerSpot reviewer
Improved the capability to analyze the environment and network problems with easy setup
It improved the capability to analyze the environment and network problems. It also helped streamline your security and performance monitoring The application I use is a script. My environment is a mix of technologies. I have many passionate people in my network who are on a journey in…
AjayKumar17 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced cybersecurity with advanced sandboxing and effective in controlling DNS issues
Improvements are needed in the UI part. The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings. This information should be integrated with the Dashboard so that system admins can see what is happening. Furthermore, technical support needs a lot of improvement, particularly in terms of responsiveness and adhering to service level agreements.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 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…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline?
The most valuable feature for improving network visibility with Gigamon is the packet filtering capability.
What needs improvement with Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline?
The challenge is monitoring the cloud network. In on-premises environments, monitoring is straightforward, as I can verify all packets and communications. However, due to the way access tools and p...
What is your primary use case for Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline?
It improved the capability to analyze the environment and network problems. It also helped streamline your security and performance monitoring.
How does Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall compare with Palo Alto Networks Wildfire?
The Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall is a very powerful and very complex piece of anti-viral software. When one considers that fact, it is all the more impressive that the setup is a fairly straightf...
Which is better - Wildfire or FortiGate?
FortiGate has a lot going for it and I consider it to be the best, most user-friendly firewall out there. What I like the most about it is that it has an attractive web dashboard with very easy nav...
How does Cisco ASA Firewall compare with Palo Alto's WildFire?
When looking to change our ASA Firewall, we looked into Palo Alto’s WildFire. It works especially in preventing advanced malware and zero-day exploits with real-time intelligence. The sandbox featu...
 

Also Known As

Gigamon, GigaSecure
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Amica Insurance, College of William & Mary, Gamma, IntercontinentalExchange, OppenheimerFunds
Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.