Cisco Firepower 2100 Series vs. Comodo Firewall

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Score 7.4 out of 10
N/A
Cisco offers the Firepower 2100 Series NGFW, designed to allow businesses to gain resiliency through superior security with sustained performance. The Firepower 2100 Series has a dual multicore CPU architecture that optimizes firewall, cryptographic, and threat inspection functions simultaneously, to achieve security doesn’t come at the expense of network performance.N/A
Comodo Firewall
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
Comodo Cybersecurity headquartered in New Jersey offers the Comodo Firewall to deliver security controls to moderate size businesses.
$29.99
per year per user
Pricing
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesComodo Firewall
Editions & Modules
Firepower 2100
3,000-20,000
per appliance
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesComodo Firewall
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesComodo Firewall
Features
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesComodo Firewall
Firewall
Comparison of Firewall features of Product A and Product B
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
8.5
2 Ratings
2% below category average
Comodo Firewall
7.0
1 Ratings
21% below category average
Identification Technologies9.02 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Visualization Tools6.01 Ratings6.01 Ratings
Content Inspection9.02 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Policy-based Controls9.02 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Active Directory and LDAP9.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Firewall Management Console8.02 Ratings6.01 Ratings
Reporting and Logging9.02 Ratings5.01 Ratings
VPN10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
High Availability10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Stateful Inspection10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Proxy Server5.02 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesComodo Firewall
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 2100 SeriesComodo Firewall
Likelihood to Recommend
5.5
(2 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesComodo Firewall
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
The Cisco [Firepower] 2100 [Series] is an easy sell for anyone looking. You already know Cisco excels in the security department, but now that firepower lives right on the box and inline with the rest of the firewall data flow you can save yourself a lot of time and headaches. Unless you cant quite afford Cisco's 2100 line, there's not much reason to go with the competition.
Read full review
Comodo
In an enterprise, where there is a threshold of many new users with whom there is a need to share the internet, Comodo Firewall can really ease the burden. Security of network and infrastructure increases with less cost compared to other alternatives. Allows advanced users to create advanced scenarios and deal with them.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • Advanced threat protection
  • Secure VPN connectivity
  • Visibility and control (if connected to FMC)
  • Regulatory compliacnce with ISO 27001, NIS2, etc.
Read full review
Comodo
  • Beginner friendly UI
  • Extensibility for pro users
  • Very low on system resources
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • Career-wise very familiar with the ASAs, you know, the previous gen firewalls, Pyxis, ASAs, the CHA. As far as being intuitive, those seem to be far more intuitive to learn and figure out what the features and changes and config management, all that stuff is. With Firepower, it's a learning curve and I feel like I have quite a bit of experience with it, and so does my team, but feels like it's not as intuitive, and trying to make changes just always seems harder for some reason. We've gone to some Cisco security training and all that, but even then it's just harder to work with. The other big thing is, and this is a big gripe of mine, I suppose, that on any other firewall, when we have various different manufacturers, if you make a change, you know, a simple change object, object name gets changed or object is deleted or whatever the simplest of change is, it gets implemented instantly.
  • With the Firepower system, you have to deploy the change and it'll take about six or seven minutes for the change to actually take, which is insanely different than any other platform where that change is instantaneous. So let's say if I'm making seven different changes for a troubleshooting job I don't know which one of the seven is gonna fix it, I do one by one by one. I'm like, oh, let me try one change, one second, change, third change, four changes. It's going to take seven deploys. And seven deploys mean it's gonna take an hour of just deploy time. So that is a big, big gripe
Read full review
Comodo
  • Provide package for Linux systems as well.
  • Pricing is still not friendly for casual users.
  • Allow API integration with web application.
Read full review
Usability
Cisco
There are three main problems with this platform: - short EoL time - it is really missery because this platform was overrated from cisco sales and after shor time they accepted on EoL - sometimes problems with upgrades paths, because of strange behaviour between FXOS and ASA image on the top of it - not good performance when comparing to newer 1k platform
Read full review
Comodo
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
In the days of purchase of Cisco Firepower 2100 series it was new platform and Cisco aimed their sailsmains to force selling this platfrom. It was one of the first platform with FXOS with full support of ASA images. It was cheper then 4k series and would be better than ASA 5500-x series (but regarding all problems with upgrades and EoL , it is not).
Read full review
Comodo
Although AWS WAF is really nice and convenient, it only runs on a web application level, no doubt it has no match in that particular segment, and it is prone to vendor locking. Comodo on the other hand provides better service on the system and network level. if you have to choose a better UI, Comodo is the best solution
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • Simplifying our lives by reducing our time spent in a console
  • Being comfortable knowing the full might of Cisco is safeguarding your network
  • A good excuse to bump up the IT budget in the next fiscal year!
Read full review
Comodo
  • For enterprise level company, it has really great ROI.
  • Not perfect fit for individual use or for small company.
  • We streamlined the process of managing network security.
Read full review
ScreenShots