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
Sophos UTM
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Sophos UTM provides core firewall features, plus sandboxing and AI threat detection for advanced network security. It has customizable deployment options.
N/A
Pricing
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Sophos UTM
Editions & Modules
Firepower 2100
3,000-20,000
per appliance
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Sophos UTM
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
t2.small - $0.123 - Total / hr
m3.medium - $0.417 - Total / hr
m3.large - $0.883 - Total / hr
m3.xlarge - $1.366 - Total / hr
m3.2xlarge- $1.982 - Total / hr
c3.large - $0.555 - Total / hr
c3.xlarge - $1.11 - Total / hr
c3.2xlarge - $1.72 - Total / hr
c3.4xlarge - $2.59 - Total / hr
c3.8xlarge - $3.68 - Total / hr
c4.large - $0.55 - Total / hr
c4.xlarge - $1.099 - Total / hr
c4.2xlarge - $1.698 - Total / hr
c4.4xlarge - $2.546 - Total / hr
c4.8xlarge - $3.841 - Total / hr
m4.large - $0.868 - Total / hr
m4.xlarge - $1.365 - Total / hr
m4.2xlarge- $1.931 - Total / hr
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Sophos UTM
Features
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Sophos UTM
Firewall
Comparison of Firewall features of Product A and Product B
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
8.5
2 Ratings
2% below category average
Sophos UTM
-
Ratings
Identification Technologies
9.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
Visualization Tools
6.01 Ratings
00 Ratings
Content Inspection
9.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
Policy-based Controls
9.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
Active Directory and LDAP
9.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
Firewall Management Console
8.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
Reporting and Logging
9.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
VPN
10.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
High Availability
10.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
Stateful Inspection
10.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
Proxy Server
5.02 Ratings
00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Sophos UTM
Small Businesses
pfSense
Score 8.8 out of 10
pfSense
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Quantum Firewalls and Security Gateways
Score 9.3 out of 10
Quantum Firewalls and Security Gateways
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
Score 9.2 out of 10
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
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.
UTM works great if you want a solid, obvious firewall. There's not a lot of second-guessing as to what you are about to do with every change you make. If you incorporate their wireless access points and RED (remote ethernet device) for remote users or small offices, it's considerably much easier to set up than other comparable solutions. If you are looking to manage your firewalls via the cloud, you are out of luck.
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
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
The interface is no non-sense and easy to understand. No need for any consultants to help implement this solution. The performance is consistent and solid. Paired with a good amount of firmware and definitions, it's hard to find any fault in this product. It's interoperability with other Sophos products make a compelling argument to invest in more Sophos products.
I find the support fair. The wait can be frustrating when dealing with fire. The pandemic has not helped with this. Although the wait can be long, the support reps are knowledgeable and was able to resolve the issues I was facing.
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).
I would rate Sophos second on this list right below Webroot. Webroot has an easier user interface and policy builder. However, Sophos would be on top of its UI would be improved. I would rank CrowStrike third and McAfee last. Sophos is great for complex environments that have multiple needs.