What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?

The pricing and licensing are fine. There's not much more variation in the price for us. We have a bundle solution.

CloudGuard is pretty expensive. Azure ends up being cheaper. They are fairly priced. It's not cheap. However, you definitely need to spend some dollars on security. While it's rather fair pricing, it was more about us having the right solution for the user base.

The product is expensive.

I do not know the exact price, but it is fairly priced. It is neither cheap nor costly. As compared to other OEM vendors in the market, it is cost-effective for us. There are multiple things we need to consider while selecting a certain product. We have AWS, Azure, and GCP clouds, and we have multiple firewalls. All of our firewalls are Check Point CloudGuard firewalls. The cost can vary based on the licenses that you are using. For IPS, IDS, antivirus, antibot, and other capabilities, additional licensing costs might be there. When it comes to security, it gives us great security. Considering that factor, it is cost-effective for us.

The tool's pricing is been higher than other solutions, but it seems like it's turning downwards.

We are using our BYOL. We are using our existing Check Point discounts to work with licensing. Overall, it is very competitive. Its pricing is reasonable to me.

I find the pricing and licensing of CloudGuard Network Security to be pretty straightforward.

The pricing is highly competitive and advantageous, offering great value.

I like the flexibility because I am pretty sure you can use the same license on Azure or AWS. I forgot the name of the license, but there is a specific type you can use that lets you interchange them, and that is pretty good. I like that.

It is fairly priced, but it can be a little expensive from time to time.

We explored both pay-as-you-go and build-your-own-licensing models, and found both to be competitive. While everyone desires lower prices, we're content with the current pricing structure, as it meets our needs effectively.

The price is fair for most of the customers. We don't find the price excessive. It's okay. We can sell it. It's not really hard. So, the pricing is good.

It is an expensive product, but when you realize that you need it, it does not feel so expensive. We have had a good experience with them as partners. They have helped us with designing and having good architecture and the best equipment at the best prices. We find it a good deal.

We have a pretty good partnership with Check Point. We have a global subscription and agreement. They give us a pretty good corporate discount. We have a global subscription to cover everything, not just the cloud but also the on-premises gateway. We have all the threat prevention subscriptions as well, which makes us stick with Check Point. Even though we get a better price offer from competitors, this global discount makes its pricing a better deal for us.

My experience has been extremely positive. It was not a concern because I had an account team that fought for pricing for our company. They were not pushing me to professional services for certain help. I was instantly getting a CloudGuard architect to help us out. They understood our environment and bridged the gap where we needed that help with our public cloud provider and with Check Point, in this case. That is what made the experience. They allowed us to scale it well, and that is where Check Point has done very well. They realize that customers need to be adaptive in their cloud deployments, and they are much quicker than on-prem. They know that in the end, their product speaks for itself, so pricing has always been very competitive compared to other vendors. I have always had account teams no matter what company I have worked for, and they have always done a good job of meeting that gap. So, its pricing was not the reason we made the decision.

The pricing is okay. I know the cost for the competitors and CloudGuard pricing is fine. It is cheaper than other firewalls.

The tool's pricing is not cheap.

Licensing is complicated. When a license expires, we have to renew it and the process is complicated. They should make the process easier.

The product is expensive but also valuable.

When we initially adopted CloudGuard, we operated under a different licensing model based on the number of hosts. The licensing model has since transitioned to a cluster-based variant.

The licesning has some good features. For example, the scaling feature is free of charge, allowing multiple scale-ups and scale-downs over a two-week period, which is pretty good. However, since we are still on an IaaS infrastructure, we end up paying for firewalls that are operational without actually handling traffic loads. This is why a PaaS approach would yield more benefits for us.

The tool's monthly costs have undergone a significant reduction, dropping from approximately 12,000 euros to around 4,000. This represents a cost reduction of over 60 percent. However, it's essential to note that while costs decreased in some areas, they increased in others due to shifts in our environment. As our overall environment has grown, currently connecting 50 accounts to the cloud, it's challenging to directly compare costs with the state of our setup three years ago.

CloudGuard Network Security's pricing is fine.

The tool's pricing is good. Customers want it to be cheap. I consider the pricing to be elastic. CloudGuard Network Security is perceived as cost-effective compared to using the built-in tools provided by the cloud. Specifically, the VPN functionality is more economical in CloudGuard Network Security, where users can create multiple VPNs without additional charges for each VPN, paying only for the bandwidth. This is contrasted with cloud providers that may charge for each VPN on a per-minute basis, including Ingress and Egress costs.

The product is too expensive.

CloudGuard Network Security is not too cheap.

The tool's pricing is reasonable.

It is the most expensive part of the product. There is a lot of room for improvement. Security comes with a price, but it is still a big chunk just for the service.

It is not expensive.

The solution's licensing is based on the number of users of the VMs. We follow a pay-as-you-go model. Its pricing is competitive.

The solution is expensive but feature-rich.

I would not say Check Point is very expensive, but when customers compare it with Sophos or any other products, the price is on the higher side.

It's not very expensive. It isn't very cheap either. Its price is okay. It depends on how much money you have. It might be expensive for some companies. Its licensing is on a yearly basis.

The pricing is fair. It's the client who is paying for it, not me directly. However, they seem satisfied.

CloudGuard is reasonable.

The costs seem high. However, the product is also incredible. It provides great value.

It is cost-effective and highly effective.

Usually, all security tools are expensive yet worth it. Check Point usually keeps a competitive price in the market.

It offers good security and everyone should be signing up for a trial for sure. It is easy to license and use.

Companies can try it for themselves and explore its great benefits.

The solution is reasonably priced in comparison with other products.

The price of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is very high compared to other solutions, such as Fortinet FortiMail. For the over 2,000 mailboxes we use with the solution it is very expensive. Here in Kenya, the cost of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is approximately $160,000. I rate the price of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security a three out of ten.

It is definitely important to test the tool before defining it in a production environment. It is also good to know the costs with a professional.

If you're managing a large cloud infrastructure this is an expensive solution. Check Point has different bundles when it comes to CloudGuard and it's a modular system.

The price and the licenses have been good. They maintain a competitive price with the other companies.

The solution is expensive. If I rate Check Point, Sophos, Fortinet, and Palo Alto, Sophos comes in at a cost that is pretty low. Then Fortinet, and then Palo Alto. Check Point is at the edge. It's a bit expensive or it's quite expensive. When you are trying to propose Check Point, it's more of an OpEX and even a CapEx project. It cannot go through a normal request for a quotation. It has to be a CapEx project. At the beginning of every financial year, a customer or end-user has to consider this to be able to purchase a Check Point firewall.

The cost is on the higher side, as it is based on workload, hence we need to decide which VPC or workload needs to be part of CloudGuard.

Although I don't have specifics for pricing, based on my overall experience, I can conclude that Check Point provides the best pricing when comparing to other vendors.

My advice is to use the trial and understand whether this is what you are really looking for.

Licensing is available on a monthly or yearly basis.

We have to pay a licensing fee, however, we haven't really done any comparison shopping, and therefore I can't speak to if it is affordable or expensive. Mostly, we are satisfied with the cost. We have some discount agreements and that's enough.

Check Point has moderate pricing. It's not the most expensive, however, it's also not the cheapest. Typically, when clients are looking for a solution, it comes down to the price.

The price could be better.

It is not expensive, but it is a little bit above the middle range. There are other solutions that are a little more expensive than this, but they also have some interesting features.

The pricing and licensing have been good. We just had to do a license increase for our portion of it. We had that done within a couple of days. Given the fact that it's purely a software-based license, it ends up being even quicker than doing it for an on-prem firewall. The only other thing that might come up is if we ever decided to do any managed services type of thing or bring in consultants. Outside of that, their cost is what it is upfront. This is outside of whatever you will end up paying AWS to run the servers. It is all pretty straightforward.

Pricing of CloudGuard is pretty fair when you have a single account. It's comparable with other cloud providers. But for our use case, it got really pricey when we had to deploy multiple CloudGuards on multiple accounts in different regions, because you can't have CloudGuard protecting multiple regions. That's the big thing.

Pricing for these kinds of products is always expensive but I would say that it's in line with the competition.

Licensing is easy since this is a virtual instance which does not require RMA.

The pricing is pretty high, not just for your capital, for what you have to pay upfront, but for what you pay for your annual software renewals as well, compared to a lot of other vendors. Check Point is near the top, as far as how much it's going to cost you. Years ago they used to piecemeal and you could pick whatever you wanted. But now they have two basic options. You can go with this level or the higher level and that's it. It makes it simple.

There is flexibility in the different licensing models that are offered. For testing/evaluation/PoC projects, you could go with the Pay-as-you-go (PAYG) license without wasting a lot of money in case the solution somehow doesn't suit you. On the other hand, for production, you could use the Bring-your-own-license (BYOL) way, applying the license bought earlier. This is a flexible approach and we like that.

If you are a Microsoft Azure customer the setup is very simple. There is already a great template there ready for deployment. Read the deployment guide fully before attempting it. Licensing is built into the deployment but you will get billed separately as a market place deployment and does not get charged to your subscription. This is a bit frustrating but they are working on fixing this

The pricing and licensing of this is much more digestible than that of its hardware equivalent. I've found, in times past, especially on the hardware side of things, that the licensing support and maintenance could be very daunting to understand. If that has scared folks away in the past, CloudGuard is much simpler. Licensing is simply by the number of hosts that you are looking to protect within your environment. It makes it much easier to ensure that you are covering your environment. If you are not already a Check Point customer for the UTM and the SmartEvent, there likely would be an additional cost, beyond the standard CloudGuard licensing, if you wanted the reporting. It's a unique instance where we already had an established infrastructure of Check Point devices on our network, and then we added CloudGuard to it. Had we started with CloudGuard, and only had virtual assets to protect, it is possible that there would be additional cost. I would urge folks to look into what it would cost to add the reporting capabilities and log event management.

The price of this solution could be improved. We pay approximately ‎€150,000 ($166,000 USD) per year. We receive four days of support every year from our service provider before we have to contact Check Point.

Compared to Cisco Firepower Threat Defense, the solution is cheap. However, not as cheap as Fortinet or Palo Alto. If clients have smaller budgets, we would have to advise one of those instead.

Check Point pricing is high. It is a sector where there is heavy competition so it does not help when trying to sell the product. But one thing is that the sales chain is fantastic. The price is usually the most difficult thing when we discuss Check Point with customers, their feedback is that it is not a competitively inexpensive product. Clients want to know why that is and if we could scale the price. Check Point can have more presence in the market, but if they want it to compete, they have to come down in price a little more. I would say 20 to 30% lower. The product is fine.

Our licensing is yearly at a fixed cost. The solution has a very flexible pricing model. It can provide the same level of security and performance, but in parallel, can be subscription-based.

It is a very expensive program and there are additional costs despite the standard licensing fees. So I would like to see it being more affordable in the future.

The price of this solution varies from small to extremely expensive. On average, it is normally on the lower end, being less expensive than Palo Alto or Cisco.

We negotiate every deal to get a discount for a higher number of devices.