Cisco Firepower 2100 Series vs. Sophos UTM

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
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 SeriesSophos UTM
Editions & Modules
Firepower 2100
3,000-20,000
per appliance
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesSophos UTM
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Detailst2.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 SeriesSophos UTM
Features
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesSophos 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 Technologies9.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Visualization Tools6.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Content Inspection9.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Policy-based Controls9.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Active Directory and LDAP9.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Firewall Management Console8.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Reporting and Logging9.02 Ratings00 Ratings
VPN10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
High Availability10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Stateful Inspection10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Proxy Server5.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesSophos UTM
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 SeriesSophos UTM
Likelihood to Recommend
5.5
(2 ratings)
9.0
(11 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
7.9
(3 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Firepower 2100 SeriesSophos UTM
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
Sophos
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.
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
Sophos
  • Firewall Protection. The protection is unmatched, setup it a little daunting, but once set up it pretty much runs itself.
  • Site-to-site VPN. Super easy to deploy so we are able to network all our sites together.
  • The DHCP server function is actually really nice, I prefer using it over the traditional way of using a DC for DHCP.
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
Sophos
  • Better standard support, it used to be great, now, not so much (for paying customers, that only aquired the Hardware)
  • Better wireless solution, there is always room for that, now that everybody needs robust wifi, even at home!
  • Faster and more robust wireless Access Points, or different vendor-like compatibility.
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
Sophos
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.
Read full review
Support Rating
Cisco
No answers on this topic
Sophos
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.
Read full review
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
Sophos
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.
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
Sophos
  • Sophos has provided a secure Firewall for us.
  • Integration with Sophos Central makes it easier to manage both.
  • Site to site VPN Failover groups has caused more trouble than it's worth.
  • High availability doesn't recognize when you are restarting for an update.
Read full review
ScreenShots