We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and OPNsense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet FortiGate is a security device. It can optimize security on the networks of a company. It actually protects the company from attacks from outside. With FortiGate, you can categorize the users. You can create a group of users that can access all of the websites for their work. You can limit other users' access."
"The simplicity of the configuration and the stability of the product are most valuable. The VPN concentrator is very useful."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"Fortinet FortiGate is user-friendly and affordable."
"FortiGate improved our security. It's one of the best hardware firewalls."
"The solution has very good threat and content filtering switches."
"It can expand easily."
"The most valuable features are SD-WAN, application control, IPS control, and FortiSandbox."
"Easy to deploy with a simple configuration."
"Dual WAN connections are greatly simplified and point-to-point VPNs automatically connect regardless of what WAN connection is active."
"WAN optimization is the best feature of the solution."
"In general, Meraki MX is easy to work with."
"It has very good features; it's easy to use, configure, set up, and deploy."
"The features we have found most valuable are the firewall and the monitoring tools."
"Easy to administer and saves time when you have many smaller locations that you have to manage."
"The technical support people from Meraki are brilliant."
"What I like the most about OPNsense is that it offers an easy-to-use dashboard for device management and control."
"The VPN server feature is the most valuable. It is integrated with Radius and AAA for doing accounting and authentication. Insight view is also an important feature for me at this time. It allows me to assess our network traffic. I also like the firewall feature. The BSD kernel has a packet filter. It is one of the most solid frameworks for firewalls. Its user interface is one of the best interfaces I have used."
"OPNsense is easy to scale when running on the hardware."
"The DNS-level filtering is impressive for thwarting time scanners."
"It has firewall and VPN capabilities, which are very valuable features."
"The graphic user interface is very good and it is user-friendly which makes the product easy-to-use."
"The IDS and IPS features are valuable. From the usability perspective, there is a lot of good documentation. As IT professionals, we found it very easy to configure the firewall. It was easy to configure and use."
"The most valuable features are reporting, the Sensei plugin, and firewall capabilities."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having a frequent ask questions(FAQ) area for people to receive quick answers to popular questions. Additionally, it would be beneficial to have an SMS notification feature. For example, if you cannot access your email you could receive an SMS message."
"With the addition of some features, it is possible that FortiGate can be used in all verticals."
"It needs to improve its ISP load balancing."
"There can be more security in hybrid implementations. When a customer has a hybrid environment where some parts are in the cloud, we need a consistent security solution for such scenarios."
"Some of the filtering is not robust, you can escape it with a VPN. Some of the users bypass some of the filters. It catches some but it also misses some, that area could be improved. It's functioning reasonably but there's room for improvement in that area."
"They've become quite expensive."
"It should have a better pricing plan. It is too expensive. It should also have a more granular view of the attack. I don't have FortiAnalyzer, and it is difficult for me to have a complete view when there is an attack on my server."
"There are problems with the custom reporting of the unique traffic. The data is there, but it is too difficult for us to extract."
"As far as what needs to be improved — nothing really comes to mind. It does what we need it to do."
"We feel that Cisco provides smaller features, with fewer possibilities versus other solutions out there."
"I need more UTM protection security features."
"The problem is that the two licenses do not currently integrate. We have to create separate companies and do an interconnection."
"We could have more reporting options and the ability to send alarms to the administrator."
"The client-side VPN is weak. The product could be improved with deployment templates."
"We had minor issues with Meraki MX. We had a couple of RMAs, so that could be an area for improvement, but in terms of how the RMAs went, the turnaround time and getting those back into redeployment were quick. Another area for improvement in Meraki MX is that when you're scaling for multiple locations, you need to use the same model, but the model you'd need is only available for a short time. The specific model you require could be out of stock, or Meraki isn't making that model anymore, so Meraki should improve that."
"Direct logging is something that can be introduced. In the absence of cloud management, the possibility of local configurations and on-premise logins becomes restricted. This limitation stands as a primary concern. When it comes to resolving issues, the inability to access login options hampers troubleshooting efforts. The stability is noteworthy; but when compared to alternative products, its stability is comparatively lower. Additionally, certain limitations are observed in terms of remote control. Price-wise, the solution stands out for its competitive and cost-effective nature compared to other alternatives. Operationally, it is user-friendly and requires minimal effort from administrators, making configuration hassle-free."
"There are issues with stability and reliability."
"The interface needs to be simplified. It is not user-friendly."
"OPNsense showed me some problems when using it in different environments. The problem is integration with a virtual server."
"An area for improvement in OPNsense is the hardware, which needs to be updated more frequently. DNS blocking is another good feature I want to be added to the solution. pfSense has a peer-blocking feature that I also want to see in OPNsense."
"The only thing that I would like to see improved is the Insight or the NetFlow analysis part. It would be good to have the possibility to dig down on the Insight platform. Right now, we can easily do only a few analyses. If this page becomes more powerful, it surely will be a well-adopted platform."
"The logging could improve in OPNsense."
"OPNsense could improve by making the configuration more web-based rather than shell or command-line-based."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 58 reviews while OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while OPNsense is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Azure Firewall, whereas OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and IPFire. See our Meraki MX vs. OPNsense report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.