Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Forcepoint NGFW

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Secure Firewall
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Secure Firewall (formerly Cisco Firepower NGFW) is a firewall product that integrates with other Cisco security offerings. It provides Advanced Malware protection, including sandboxing environments and DDoS mitigation. Cisco also offers a Next Generation Intrusion Prevention System, which provides security across cloud environments using techniques like internal network segmentation. The firewall can be managed locally, remotely, and via the cloud. The product is scalable to the scope of…N/A
Forcepoint NGFW
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall (NGFW) promises seamless and central management, whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Administrators can deploy, monitor and update thousands of firewalls, VPNs and IPSs in minutes, all from a single console. The vendor says that the product reduces network operating expenses by as much as 50%. Advanced clustering for firewalls and networks eliminates downtime, and administrators can rapidly map business processes into strong, accurate controls to…N/A
Pricing
Cisco Secure FirewallForcepoint NGFW
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Secure FirewallForcepoint NGFW
Free Trial
NoYes
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 Secure FirewallForcepoint NGFW
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Cisco Secure FirewallForcepoint NGFW
Firewall
Comparison of Firewall features of Product A and Product B
Cisco Secure Firewall
7.5
62 Ratings
12% below category average
Forcepoint NGFW
8.1
1 Ratings
5% below category average
Identification Technologies7.654 Ratings5.01 Ratings
Visualization Tools6.556 Ratings5.01 Ratings
Content Inspection7.656 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Policy-based Controls8.159 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Active Directory and LDAP7.551 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Firewall Management Console7.459 Ratings10.01 Ratings
Reporting and Logging7.060 Ratings8.01 Ratings
VPN7.852 Ratings9.01 Ratings
High Availability7.857 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Stateful Inspection8.056 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Proxy Server6.834 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Secure FirewallForcepoint NGFW
Small Businesses
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.2 out of 10
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.2 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Score 9.3 out of 10
Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Score 9.3 out of 10
Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco Secure FirewallForcepoint NGFW
Likelihood to Recommend
7.6
(62 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
6.1
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(2 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Availability
9.6
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
5.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.6
(21 ratings)
6.0
(1 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
5.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Secure FirewallForcepoint NGFW
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
Sometimes it is really hard to handle. There are so many bugs especially when it comes to ACL or HA creation. Sometimes the Cisco Secure Firewall just needs a restart in order to work but that shouldn't be like that in our environment the Cisco Secure Firewall is the heart of the network and if the Cisco Secure Firewall is down the whole branch is down, for that we need a more reliable product.
Read full review
Forcepoint
If you are looking for a smaller network/security team, the ease and low complexity create an easy to manage environment. One engineer can easily manage 100 nodes/locations. If you are just starting to get security conscious and predict regular adjustments to policy, routing, and access, this is a very good system for making easy to understand and low impact changes on a regular basis without operations interruption.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • How the firewall works well is normally the firewall is protecting the secure network for the internal network to prevent the attack from external network. normally for the ISP customer, we usually filter the firewall polices only for the server farm, server farm because normally in ISP is the customer doesn't want to be filtered. So only for the server farm, they need the firewall for the enterprise like banking and for the DDoS attack, like the malware attack, something like that. And then sometimes it's some customer in ISPalso, they got the many DDoS attack and then they are using the public ip. When there are using the public ip, they need to protect their ip. So they need to use the firewall. So the firewall is essentially needed. many attackers and many, many things, terrible things have been to the network which has large impact..
Read full review
Forcepoint
  • Easy to manage and make changes on - ACL's are done with ease.
  • Easy USB initial configuration - The easy initial setup of a new location and firewall saves massive time. Settings are automatically pushed to new nodes upon contact with the controller.
  • Low Complexity - This system does not have a lot of complexity requiring extra hours, training, or personnel to manage.
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • The UI in Cisco Firepower formerly Sourcefire) is complicated and entirely redundant. A lot of these features are not useful, and therefore, it can be removed from the main window.
  • The interface is very slow, with each operation taking a lot of time. Searching through the logs takes too much time.
Read full review
Forcepoint
  • Poor Reporting - It exists but even when calling in to support for assistance, they have no idea how to tackle customizing reports or searching for specific data.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Cisco
It works really well. We can do most anything we want or need to with it, and you don’t have to have a doctorate or multiple certs to necessarily figure it out. The thing that would probably have to happen to make us switch would be if we just got priced out - Cisco’s more powerful and higher bandwidth models cost a pretty penny.
Read full review
Forcepoint
No answers on this topic
Usability
Cisco
Solution is highly effective, offers a lot of features with constant improvements and additions of new features over time. It's relatively easy to get familiar with the system, especially if transitioning from adaptive security appliances. If this is not the case, as for learnability there's a learning curve but once learned it is relatively easy to remember the details about the system even after a period of non-use
Read full review
Forcepoint
The Graphical User Interface is very easy to read, understand and work with. The usability of this product is very high.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Cisco
We have had really good success with Cisco Secure Firewall when it comes to availability. Even when we’ve had temporary issues with one appliance or the other, or with the Firewall Management Center, it has stayed up and defended our network diligently. We even had an issue where the licensing got disabled for multiple days, and it kept spinning like a top
Read full review
Forcepoint
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Cisco
Customer service has been great. TAC has been mostly able to identify and fix problems that we may have and have been very responsive. If for some reason something isn't fixed right away, they have been adamant on staying with us and working the issues out before things get escalated up the chain.
Read full review
Forcepoint
Support has varied over the history of the company. Terro is a name that comes up often with the best of service from this company.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Cisco
In the beginning transition from Adaptive Security Appliance to Cisco Secure Firewall did not look like the best choice. Solution was new, there were a lot of bugs and unsupported features and the actual execution in the form of configuration via Firepower Management Center was extremely slow. Compare configuring a feature via CLI on ASA in a manner of seconds (copy/paste) to deployment via FMC to Secure Firewall which took approx. 10 mins (no exaggeration). Today, situation is a bit different, overall solution looks much more stable and faster then it was but there's still room for improvement.
Read full review
Forcepoint
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
We use the FMC as a virtual machine, it combines administration, monitoring and can be used perfectly for error analysis. There are restrictions due to administration without the FMC, so we decided on the FMC as the central administration.
Read full review
Forcepoint
There are similar hardware and license costs between the two products. The Forcepoint NGFW product is by far easier to use and manage.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • Cisco Secure Firewall has provided a single management interface for all of our devices.
  • We have had issues implementing 1010 in HA where a site was using a dynamic IP previously.
  • Lack of DHCP options has slowed deployment to our smaller sites.
Read full review
Forcepoint
  • Efficiency/Productivity increase. The company moved from Cisco firewall and routing hardware to Forcepoint NGFW. It now takes fewer people and fewer hours to manage the new product. This has allowed the company to put the man-hours to use on other projects and tasks.
  • Long term viability. This has been a concern in the past when the company started as Stonegate, merged to become Stonesoft then got purchased by McAfee, then McAfee got purchased by Intel. However, with Forcepoint the product seems to have found a stable home.
  • Low complexity. The Web GUI based system for management has reduced the cost of personnel and training required. There is no longer a need for the company to have higher trained and higher salary cost employees to manage the system. Mid-level admins at lower salaries are capable of managing the GUI based system with ease.
Read full review
ScreenShots