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

Portnox vs Sophos Network Access Control comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 27, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Customer Service

Sentiment score
4.5
Portnox offers praised customer support, though users seek improvements in local services, ticketing, and response time.
Sentiment score
6.9
Sophos Network Access Control support is praised for responsiveness, knowledgeable reps, fast resolutions, and reliable local availability despite time zone delays.
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
6.2
Portnox needs enhanced integration, improved scalability, refined GUI, device-based licensing, faster response, and expanded agentless coverage.
Sentiment score
4.8
Sophos Network Access Control needs better integration, reduced resource use, and improved interface, pricing, and AI features for enhancement.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Portnox is valued for its scalability and flexibility, supporting thousands of endpoints through a convenient license-based model.
Sentiment score
6.7
Sophos Network Access Control is scalable and modular, ideal for medium and large enterprises, but may be costly for smaller entities.
 

Setup Cost

No sentiment score available
Portnox offers scalable pricing with annual fees, device charges, and enterprise features, though some users dislike subscription-only licensing.
No sentiment score available
Sophos Network Access Control offers flexible, modular pricing, considered mid-range, varying by enterprise needs and configuration requirements.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
4.9
Portnox is mostly reliable with positive feedback, but CORE faces criticism due to deprecated status and support issues.
Sentiment score
8.5
Sophos Network Access Control is highly praised for stability, reliability, and seamless integration, with users rating it very highly.
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.3
Portnox provides scalable, user-friendly network security with diverse integration, robust monitoring, efficient management, and strong compliance tools.
Sentiment score
8.1
Sophos Network Access Control excels in security, OSI integration, scalability, user-friendly interface, and reliable support with low resource use.
 

Categories and Ranking

Portnox
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
ZTNA (13th), Passwordless Authentication (6th)
Sophos Network Access Control
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Portnox is 2.3%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sophos Network Access Control is 1.3%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

Afeez Adeyemo - PeerSpot reviewer
An affordable tool to monitor routers and access points
A lot of our company's customers who use Portnox Clear feel that since it is an agentless solution, it is not well-equipped enough to cover all the devices in their environment. Sometimes, our company has to explain things to our customers and spend extra time trying to convince them that there are no problems with the solution. I don't know if Portnox can introduce agents for Clear or come up with some other values that would make selling the product easier for our company while ensuring that the customers are more open to receiving Portnox Clear in their environment. As there are no agents in Portnox Clear, the customers of the product cannot download any agents on their devices, making them unsure if the product offers proper security. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement in the solution. The features that are offered by the product are great. If there is progress in security concerns, then Portnox Clear might have to add new features. The features that the product provides are the standard ones that are in line with the other network assistant tools or solutions in the market.
Marco-VIVALDELLI - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable with good security capabilities and an easy setup
The user interface, in terms of managing the product, could be better. For example, having some sort of configuration scanner could be useful. I need some sort of base solution that I can provide to the company to set up a first level of service for the company. That way, I can install the product and set up a first level of security. After that, we can run some analysis with the company, with the key manager, and so on, and then customize the product to better suit their needs. It would help us create more tailored policies. That said, we need to have some base configuration that we can use as a kickoff in terms of saying, "Okay, this is a first-level configuration; that is enough to guarantee a correct level of protection from your point of view." And in this way, there is the possibility in the weeks to follow to customize the product better and more effectively over time to introduce a second level of features more specific to a single company. What could be an improvement, and what more competitors are doing, is introducing more advanced features in terms of artificial intelligence. This product needs more AI. It's useful to introduce systems to help prevent problems and better identify issues. The product needs to centralize information from devices and work to create a common database where an AI algorithm could have access to all of the information worldwide and therefore become better at predicting issues and finding problems. They need to widen their vision in the way competitors are to provide a higher level of security going forward.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
816,660 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
University
6%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
10%
Educational Organization
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Portnox CORE?
It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portnox CORE?
It's not cheap. It's not expensive. It's in the middle, so I'll probably give it a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with Portnox CORE?
We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE. At the end of the day, Portnox Clear's capabilities are much more...
What do you like most about Sophos Network Access Control?
Sophos Network Access Control has a useful interface, and I like its dashboard, which is very useful for us to check everything.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sophos Network Access Control?
I am not able to say much on the financial specifics as it pertains to the sales unit.
What needs improvement with Sophos Network Access Control?
For now, I may not be able to say exactly what needs improvement. However, continuous development in specific areas might be required.
 

Also Known As

Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines, 
Rushmoor Borough Council
Find out what your peers are saying about Portnox vs. Sophos Network Access Control and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,660 professionals have used our research since 2012.