Cisco Firepower 4100 Series vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Firepower 4100 Series
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
The Cisco Firepower 4100 Series’ 1-rack-unit size is presented by the vendodr as ideal at the Internet edge and in high-performance environments. They further state that it shows what’s happening on your network, detects attacks earlier so you can act faster, and reduces management complexity.N/A
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Cortex XDR (formerly Traps) replaces traditional antivirus with multi-method prevention, a proprietary combination of malware and exploit prevention methods that protect users and endpoints from known and unknown threats.N/A
Pricing
Cisco Firepower 4100 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Editions & Modules
Firepower 4100
50,000-250,000
per appliance
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Firepower 4100 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Free Trial
NoNo
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 Firepower 4100 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Features
Cisco Firepower 4100 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Firewall
Comparison of Firewall features of Product A and Product B
Cisco Firepower 4100 Series
8.4
5 Ratings
2% below category average
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
-
Ratings
Identification Technologies8.15 Ratings00 Ratings
Visualization Tools8.15 Ratings00 Ratings
Content Inspection8.94 Ratings00 Ratings
Policy-based Controls8.65 Ratings00 Ratings
Active Directory and LDAP8.54 Ratings00 Ratings
Firewall Management Console8.65 Ratings00 Ratings
Reporting and Logging8.45 Ratings00 Ratings
VPN7.95 Ratings00 Ratings
High Availability9.35 Ratings00 Ratings
Stateful Inspection9.55 Ratings00 Ratings
Proxy Server6.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Firepower 4100 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Small Businesses
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.4 out of 10
Watchguard Endpoint Security
Watchguard Endpoint Security
Score 8.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.4 out of 10
CrowdStrike Falcon
CrowdStrike Falcon
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
Score 9.5 out of 10
CrowdStrike Falcon
CrowdStrike Falcon
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco Firepower 4100 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(4 ratings)
8.0
(13 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(1 ratings)
6.8
(2 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(3 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Firepower 4100 SeriesPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
When we are asked by local partners which security equipment we use we always recommend our Cisco security products. The Firepower firewall is no exception and we can easily recommend this to others who need a fast, secure, and well built system that integrates well with all your existing hardware and software.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
Malware that doesn’t leave files behind has become widely available. Anyone who can afford to reverse this trend should purchase technology. Application whitelisting isn’t for everyone, and Palo Alto Networks Traps can help. Enterprises looking for a low-affected, next-generation solution with high protection should consider it. PAN Traps is a great product at a reasonable price, and I highly recommend it.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • Packet filtering
  • Great vpn client
  • Integrates correctly with other vendors
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • Direct Access to devices via Live Terminal which provides operations with scripting, triage, and preservation of artifacts.
  • Behavioral Indicators of Compromise which provides alerts on events regarding groups of hosts and their signatures.
  • Querying complex data sets involving a variety of devices for network connections, hashes, DNS, etc.
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • Too much time to deploy changes
  • When there are a lot of entries in the ldap mapping the device runs slow
  • You can not make config changes via CLI, only via GUI
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • Traps doesn't seem to function as a traditional A/V very well, so it's better as another layer to your endpoint protection
  • Traps can cause issues with some legacy or custom programs, so exceptions may have to be made
  • Traps falsely identifies things as malicious at times, this is not often though
Read full review
Usability
Cisco
It not easy to understand the different features it offers. Sometimes you need to spend a couple of minutes to implement a change or even open a ticket with cisco tac to figure it out. Once support is on the phone with you they know how to resolve problems. But it's not an intuitive tool
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
Cortex XDR does a very good job of blocking suspicious and threatening items. However, as with all software of this nature, it will sometimes block known-good items. The difficulty is in manually whitelisting these known-good items. The interface to whitelist is confusing even for a seasoned IT professional and has been the single most frustrating experience of using Cortex XDR
Read full review
Support Rating
Cisco
No answers on this topic
Palo Alto Networks
The support we receive from Palo Alto is one of the best aspects of Traps. It is very easy to recommend their support. It seems much easier to connect directly with someone with a deep understanding of the product rather than other companies where you basically have to make an airtight case that it is some kind of non-standard issue that can't be solved with existing documentation. Palo Alto digs deep and helps with advanced troubleshooting to get things working.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
As I mentioned before, the Fortigates have better failover. I think the Cisco interface is easier to use that that of the FortiGate. My only criticism would be that with multiple CLIs, it can get a bit confusing when you are trying to configure something or troubleshoot from the CLI.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
Traps is the slickest interface, easy to use and intuitive rule making, and the rest just didn't quite stack up to the performance level of Traps. McAfee and Kaspersky just hog processor and RAM power. I didn't like the interface and functionality of SentinelOne as much as Traps. Palo Alto really put a lot of time into the development of this software, and had some of the founding fathers of IT Security heading the development process. Can't beat that.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • Very stable and does not cause major interruption.
  • Supports most of the business requirements.
  • Enhance security, risk and compliance.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • After putting Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR on a user's system, users came back with a positive response that there are no performance issues now.
  • We are able to track and control granular suspicious and malicious activities.
  • Web controls are missing, which if they would have been there would have been very helpful.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR Screenshots

Screenshot of a Cortex XDR overviewScreenshot of a view of the Cortex XDR dashboardScreenshot of a view of the Cortex XDR dashboardScreenshot of a view of the Cortex XDR dashboard