Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000) vs. Forcepoint NGFW

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000)
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
The Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000) is a SD-WAN ready router.N/A
Forcepoint NGFW
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall (NGFW) promises seamless and central management, whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Administrators can deploy, monitor and update thousands of firewalls, VPNs and IPSs in minutes, all from a single console. The vendor says that the product reduces network operating expenses by as much as 50%. Advanced clustering for firewalls and networks eliminates downtime, and administrators can rapidly map business processes into strong, accurate controls to…N/A
Pricing
Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000)Forcepoint NGFW
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000)Forcepoint NGFW
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000)Forcepoint NGFW
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000)Forcepoint NGFW
Firewall
Comparison of Firewall features of Product A and Product B
Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000)
-
Ratings
Forcepoint NGFW
8.1
1 Ratings
5% below category average
Identification Technologies00 Ratings5.01 Ratings
Visualization Tools00 Ratings5.01 Ratings
Content Inspection00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Policy-based Controls00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Active Directory and LDAP00 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Firewall Management Console00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Reporting and Logging00 Ratings8.01 Ratings
VPN00 Ratings9.01 Ratings
High Availability00 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Stateful Inspection00 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000)Forcepoint NGFW
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Cisco Routers
Cisco Routers
Score 8.5 out of 10
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Cisco Routers
Cisco Routers
Score 8.5 out of 10
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Score 9.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000)Forcepoint NGFW
Likelihood to Recommend
9.3
(25 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.9
(2 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
9.3
(3 ratings)
6.0
(1 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco 1000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR 1000)Forcepoint NGFW
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
- It is well suited for companies that have a big WAN environment, this devices can fit in there easily and have multiple provider circuits. - Well suited for private cloud environments where multi tenancy is required, - Device can be used as IPN/ISN device as it supports jumbo frames for an ACI multi-site/remote leaf deployment. - Device is well suited for branches that have their own DIA and MPLS circuits.
Read full review
Forcepoint
If you are looking for a smaller network/security team, the ease and low complexity create an easy to manage environment. One engineer can easily manage 100 nodes/locations. If you are just starting to get security conscious and predict regular adjustments to policy, routing, and access, this is a very good system for making easy to understand and low impact changes on a regular basis without operations interruption.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • These routers are very good at performing 24x7! This is key to running an organization where employees are working 24x7.
  • The ZBFW feature works especially well to help lockdown and protect your network.
  • Having the ability to perform in-service upgrades is a key feature in keeping your network up at all times.
Read full review
Forcepoint
  • Easy to manage and make changes on - ACL's are done with ease.
  • Easy USB initial configuration - The easy initial setup of a new location and firewall saves massive time. Settings are automatically pushed to new nodes upon contact with the controller.
  • Low Complexity - This system does not have a lot of complexity requiring extra hours, training, or personnel to manage.
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • The ASR 1000 series routers can, as with most devices, improve with additional memory capacity and upgraded chip sets for faster processing.
  • There seems to be limitations on the number of routing sessions the smaller ASR devices can handle, which can be overcome with proper planning and placement within the network.
Read full review
Forcepoint
  • Poor Reporting - It exists but even when calling in to support for assistance, they have no idea how to tackle customizing reports or searching for specific data.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Cisco
The device without a doubts performs at the level required and expected, we can renew it and use it as we have been using it for years. The device can be used as DCI, IPN/ISN, or even private cloud for customer circuit handoff, it also supports IPSec properly. The device is well suited in multiple segments of the network.
Read full review
Forcepoint
No answers on this topic
Usability
Cisco
All our modular contingency service exercises use this equipment, it allows us to perform this type of exercises very easily, in a controlled and effective way. It is used at least once a month for these types of events. It also allows configuration replication in computers that are under the same model.
Read full review
Forcepoint
The Graphical User Interface is very easy to read, understand and work with. The usability of this product is very high.
Read full review
Support Rating
Cisco
We have received training on the equipment, which has made us add more networks on our own, we provide first level support, we validate the publication of the equipment and we can satisfy the needs of our internal clients in terms of the prompt recovery of the affected services
Read full review
Forcepoint
Support has varied over the history of the company. Terro is a name that comes up often with the best of service from this company.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Cisco
Implementation was as per design and all best practice configuration was followed.
Read full review
Forcepoint
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
Before standardizing on the Cisco ASR 1000 we had explored the idea of using Juniper routers. Ultimately we felt the Cisco ASR 1000 was a better fit at the time. We have been very happy with this decision, but it might not be the right decision for everyone. It fit our environment and our needs very well, Juniper is also a very good choice.
Read full review
Forcepoint
There are similar hardware and license costs between the two products. The Forcepoint NGFW product is by far easier to use and manage.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • It is a healthy return on investment with planned packed size data. Average unicast latency is low and consistent with small and large packets (barring mid-sized).
  • Cisco devices last longer and also have a decent trade-in policy to recover some value when equipment is replaced.
  • Higher concurrent IPSec tunnels are offered, we tested for 1500+, fielding both encrypted and a mix of encrypted and cleartext traffic.
Read full review
Forcepoint
  • Efficiency/Productivity increase. The company moved from Cisco firewall and routing hardware to Forcepoint NGFW. It now takes fewer people and fewer hours to manage the new product. This has allowed the company to put the man-hours to use on other projects and tasks.
  • Long term viability. This has been a concern in the past when the company started as Stonegate, merged to become Stonesoft then got purchased by McAfee, then McAfee got purchased by Intel. However, with Forcepoint the product seems to have found a stable home.
  • Low complexity. The Web GUI based system for management has reduced the cost of personnel and training required. There is no longer a need for the company to have higher trained and higher salary cost employees to manage the system. Mid-level admins at lower salaries are capable of managing the GUI based system with ease.
Read full review
ScreenShots