Cisco Firepower 1000 Series vs. Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Firepower 1000 Series
Score 7.9 out of 10
N/A
The Cisco Firepower® 1000 Series for small to medium-size businesses and branch offices is a family of four threat-focused Next-Generation Firewall (NGFW) security platforms designed to deliver business resiliency through superior threat defense. The vendor provides that they offers exceptional sustained performance when advanced threat functions are enabled. The 1000 Series’ throughput range addresses use cases from the small office, home office, remote branch office to the Internet edge. The…N/A
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Palo Alto Network’s Next-Generation Firewalls is a firewall option integrated with other Palo Alto security products. Released in late 2023, the PA-7500 ML-Powered NextGeneration Firewall (NGFW) enables enterprise-scale organizations and service providers to deploy security in high-performance environments.
$1.50
per hour per available zone
Pricing
Cisco Firepower 1000 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Editions & Modules
Firepower 1000
1,000-5,000
per appliance
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Firepower 1000 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsUsers may also choose to pay per gigabyte of data used starting at .065/GB. Note that prices listed here reflect installations via Amazon Web Services. Pricing may differ if other service providers are used.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Firepower 1000 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Considered Both Products
Cisco Firepower 1000 Series
Chose Cisco Firepower 1000 Series
[We've used] checkpoint 2200 and 3200 models. Based on the compromises we had to make by not applying the "Optimised" IPS profile and High CPU problems, I would suggest Firepower 1000 but Meraki MX series can take away the spot light from Firepower 1000.
Chose Cisco Firepower 1000 Series
No issues from a technical standpoint - Firepowers are secure, reliable and do what they say on the tin. Central management and configuration is easy and they fit in well with our existing Cisco infrastructure. These are not the cheapest available option for firewalls and we …
Chose Cisco Firepower 1000 Series
I have had experience with many firewalls and firewall management solutions. Many companies choose to opt for the Cisco Firepower 1000 Series because the threat intelligence from Cisco and the ease of administration for intrusion prevention is very competitive. As far as …
Chose Cisco Firepower 1000 Series
In terms of cost-effectiveness, Cisco gives the same or better service at a lower cost compared to Palo Alto devices. There are other products in the market with similar protection services and even lower cost but customer service is not as good as Cisco. So, it is a combined …
Chose Cisco Firepower 1000 Series
Cisco is up there, not the lowest cost in terms of initial purchase or maintenance. Also not quite the best in terms of reputation yet but getting better. Some companies bundle their hardware, license, and support better. Cisco has a more modular approach that allows for choice …
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Chose Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Cisco Firepower only has basic functionality, URL filtering always create problems also GUI is very bad that's why most organization [are] using Palo Alto rather than Cisco Firepower.
Features
Cisco Firepower 1000 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Firewall
Comparison of Firewall features of Product A and Product B
Cisco Firepower 1000 Series
8.3
33 Ratings
4% below category average
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
8.7
27 Ratings
0% above category average
Identification Technologies8.031 Ratings9.127 Ratings
Visualization Tools7.230 Ratings7.626 Ratings
Content Inspection8.330 Ratings9.527 Ratings
Policy-based Controls8.733 Ratings9.727 Ratings
Active Directory and LDAP8.529 Ratings9.026 Ratings
Firewall Management Console7.232 Ratings8.827 Ratings
Reporting and Logging8.333 Ratings8.327 Ratings
VPN9.128 Ratings8.727 Ratings
High Availability9.232 Ratings8.826 Ratings
Stateful Inspection8.828 Ratings9.026 Ratings
Proxy Server00 Ratings7.413 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Firepower 1000 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Small Businesses
pfSense
pfSense
Score 8.8 out of 10
pfSense
pfSense
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Quantum Firewalls and Security Gateways
Quantum Firewalls and Security Gateways
Score 9.3 out of 10
Quantum Firewalls and Security Gateways
Quantum Firewalls and Security Gateways
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
Score 9.2 out of 10
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco Firepower 1000 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Likelihood to Recommend
8.3
(34 ratings)
9.0
(43 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
7.0
(2 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(5 ratings)
8.5
(8 ratings)
Availability
8.1
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.3
(29 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.5
(34 ratings)
8.4
(9 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
8.1
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Firepower 1000 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
I think it is well suited for smaller companies or (as in our case) extension to a central system with higher performance. My personal guess is, that it can be quite annoying with those delays in bigger environments, when 20 or more devices needed to be managed. From the point of security, support and updates it works quite good and seem to have no downsides.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
It is well-suited for a company needing strong edge security with ease of administration. It comes standard with many features such as VPN, Application ID and "Day-1 Config" that make the networks it protects secure from the very start. Palo is definitely a premium product and is much more expensive than other firewalls, but the value is realized immediately. The robust options for firewall rules/policies allow the administrator to apply security in new and creative ways to hit the sweet spot between security and usability.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • My organization is all Cisco and wants to stay in the Cisco life cycle, Firepower 1000 series is great for small to medium-size office.
  • Very robust enterprise-grade security solution with updated threat features to handle any current and upcoming threats. The solution is backed by Cisco to ensure constant security updates. Integrated AnyConnect remote client VPN is a big plus to allow for secure remote workers access. Easier to set up a site to site VPN due to the large user base and case studies published on integrating to other manufacturer solutions.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • The PA handles VPN connectivity without missing a beat. We have multiple VPN tunnels in use for redundancy to cloud-based services.
  • The PA has great functionality in supporting failover internet connections, again with the ability to have multiple paths out to our cloud-based services.
  • The PA is updated on the regular with various security updates, we are not concerned with the firewall's ability to see what packets are really flowing across the network. Being able to see beyond just IP and port requests lets you know things are locked down better than traditional firewalls.
  • It is a great overall kit, with URL filtering and other services that fill in the gaps between other solutions without breaking the bank.
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • ACLS in gui are PIA cant see object details
  • Objects in ACLs dont show IP addresses
  • Have to renames every object to name+ip to make acl GUI useable
  • Speed to data can use improvement.
  • Health warnings should allow you to resolve you have to dig n search in some cases.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • Setting up certain things can be somewhat complicated due to the numerous options and abstractions involved.
  • It would be nice to have somewhere to get simple canned reports easily.
  • It would be nice to be able to remove options we never use from various setup dialogs.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Cisco
It is quite good, robust and reliable but not always so easy to manage and configure. The tools could be improved and the price is not low for an entry level firewall
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
The PA5220s have far exceeded what we have expected out of them. It was a bit of a learning curve coming from another vendor, but everything falls into place now with ease. The capabilities of the solution still surprise us, allowing us to remove other costly hardware and providing a single point of management needed
Read full review
Usability
Cisco
Firepowers are secure, reliable, central management and configuration is easy and they fit in well with our existing Cisco infrastructure. Good feature set and support. Good management and control with chassis manager and central control with additional Firepower Management Centre.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
It can be a little tricky at first if you have never used the product or a firewall before. If you have experience with firewalls in general, it does not take long to learn the Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series interface. They offer great training resources and knowledge base articles to help get up to speed.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Cisco
Has not let me down yet.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Performance
Cisco
Great performance even on the lower end model of the series. You can push a lot of traffic through these devices without much performance impact. If you decide you want to inspect encrypted traffic however, you may take a big hit on the cpu and memory of the box, but they still manage to keep up even with all the bells and whistles turned on.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Cisco
I have had troubles with Firepower Management Center and the FTD's in the past. Sticking to a Gold Star image and upgrading when the "bugs" are fixed is great. That still doesn't mean you are left vulnerable though. The extra features are just not enabled yet. Great product and calling support is readily available for any issue.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
We've run into a couple undocumented bugs, but that seems to happen with every brand and technology. Any time we've had to engage Palo Alto support they've always been professional, knowledgeable and prompt. In almost all cases we've been able to resolve our issues without having to escalate our tickets.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Cisco
Utilize the new FMC cloud which is available in Cisco Defense Orchestrator.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
Cisco Meraki MX is much more simple to configure it if you compare to Cisco Firepower 1000, but it is more limited to pur some complex configurations. The Cisco Firepower 1000 Series is typically deployed as a physical appliance, while the Meraki MX can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance.The Firepower 1000 Series has a more complex user interface, with a steeper learning curve, but offers more customization and configuration options. The Meraki MX has a simpler, more intuitive interface,
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
We are using Cisco ASA before in our environment but when it comes to deep scanning & layer 7 security it doesn't have that capability. After using Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall we are using sandboxing & advance malware protection that provides high-level end-user security. Also after implementing it we can easily monitor user-level traffic.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • We have seen improved throughput on our internet.
  • It took several attempts with Cisco engineers to configure the device; it requires a deep set of knowledge to set up in a more complicated environment.
  • This will allow us to move forward with a more stable and configurable environment with security available we didn't have before.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • We used to outsource our Firewall and it's management. Not only did we find their SLA's to be lacking, in general, but communication between us was horrible. Many times we could not understand them and that resulted in less than desirable rule creation or troubleshooting.
  • Since we no longer have to pay a company for 24/7 management (and SLOW SLA's) we are saving a ton of money each year. Also our fellow employee's are much happier that things can be resolved in a timely manner.
Read full review
ScreenShots