Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Secure Firewall
Score 8.0 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
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Score 9.3 out of 10
N/A
Palo Alto next-generation firewalls classify all traffic, including encrypted and internal traffic, based on application, application function, user and content. Users can create security policies to enable only authorized users to run sanctioned applications.N/A
Pricing
Cisco Secure FirewallPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Secure FirewallPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details—Palo Alto Networks offers two pricing models: one based on usage hour in each available zone and another based on total traffic secured. Pricing for use with AWS is as follows: $1.50 /hr for up to 3 Available Zones $.50/ hr for each additional AZ OR $.065/GB for the first 15 TB $.045/GB for the next 15 TB $.03/GB for above 30 TB
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Secure FirewallPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Considered Both Products
Cisco Secure Firewall
Chose Cisco Secure Firewall
We had a lot of bugs with CheckPoint, Cisco Secure Firewalls are much more reliable over time.
Chose Cisco Secure Firewall
Different logic between the products, each one has their strengths and weaknesses.
Chose Cisco Secure Firewall
Both palo alto and Cisco Secure Firewall have their strengths, and weaknesses. For our usage for GTP none other is relevant.
Chose Cisco Secure Firewall
We use both vendors in our environment, I believe it's positive to go with multi vendor approach. As previously mentioned, the PA has the global find option, which is a big asset when troubleshooting. On the other hand, I feel the FTD's CLI is more intuitive and can help you …
Chose Cisco Secure Firewall
I believe Cisco firewalls are definitely on par with Palo Alto but the latest AI feature releasing in 2024 will certainly surpass all expectations. Fortinet is going to struggle after this and I can say that with certainty given we have removed all our FortiGate firewalls.
Chose Cisco Secure Firewall
Cisco offers a great troubleshooting UI this makes things easier to fix an issue, you can capture traffic from CLI as you did with ASA and through the GUI and read the captures. Easy to deploy and integrate in any architecture.

URL filtering is very rich, you can find multiple …
Chose Cisco Secure Firewall
We found that Cisco compares very favorably to the Palo Alto firewalls, especially with their latest release in the Secure Firewall line. The performance has been phenomenal compared to the earlier Firepower models, which was one of the few advantages I felt Palo Alto still …
Chose Cisco Secure Firewall
Palo Alto has better architecture with their multi cpu concept that increases throughoutput.
Cisco has better features and mostly better integrations outside of their eco system.
Overall the products and features of cisco are slightly better but if cisco would implement the …
Chose Cisco Secure Firewall
Cisco Firepower NGFW is much more user friendly than its competitors and their customer service is top notch. It was a no brainer in choosing a company that has the backing to help provide a great product and service to its customers. Cisco Firepower NGFW is easy to use, easy …
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Chose Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Palo Alto beats all other current UTM/NGFW at this point in time. Palo Alto has a complete vision and is less buggy/requires less management overhead than other NGFW/UTMs on the market. They are currently developing a lot of products and I can see in the next 5 years, other …
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Cisco Secure FirewallPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Firewall
Comparison of Firewall features of Product A and Product B
Cisco Secure Firewall
7.7
81 Ratings
11% below category average
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
8.7
23 Ratings
1% above category average
Identification Technologies7.968 Ratings9.523 Ratings
Visualization Tools6.973 Ratings7.523 Ratings
Content Inspection7.872 Ratings10.023 Ratings
Policy-based Controls8.478 Ratings10.023 Ratings
Active Directory and LDAP8.065 Ratings9.522 Ratings
Firewall Management Console7.576 Ratings9.023 Ratings
Reporting and Logging7.477 Ratings8.023 Ratings
VPN7.866 Ratings9.023 Ratings
High Availability8.373 Ratings9.522 Ratings
Stateful Inspection8.272 Ratings9.022 Ratings
Proxy Server6.942 Ratings5.011 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Secure FirewallPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Small Businesses
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.4 out of 10
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.4 out of 10
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.4 out of 10
Enterprises
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Score 9.3 out of 10
Cisco Meraki MX
Cisco Meraki MX
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco Secure FirewallPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Likelihood to Recommend
7.8
(88 ratings)
9.5
(39 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
7.0
(2 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(2 ratings)
9.0
(4 ratings)
Availability
9.2
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
5.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.3
(37 ratings)
8.4
(9 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.9
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
5.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Secure FirewallPalo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
Well suited any edge kind of protection, which is obviously, again, what firewalls really used for. Less suited if you need more detailed protection, more granular, shall I say it's a better word, more granular protection. The ability to filter not just on IPS and ports, but a much deeper look at the packets and do that.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series are extremely versatile. Whether it be a one office location or multiple sites, the Panorama interface allows centralized management. I've found Palo Alto does a great job with their updates and supporting customers. As a cybersecurity professional, I like that Palo Alto's products offer a wide range of controls to support defense in depth. It is easy for security and network infrastructure teams to use the same consoles to deliver performance with security built in.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • It's been a big change for us because like I said, we've been using it about a year, I think. And we went from ASAs to this, so it was a big changeover from being able to do everything in CLI honestly, it's a bit clunky and more time consuming to have to configure things through the Gooey, which has been a pain point for us. But we've tried to automate as much as we can. What it does well is the analysis. The event, not event viewer, but unified event, that's what it is. Handy tool. Also the tunnel troubleshooting the site to site tunnel monitoring or troubleshooting, I can't remember what it's called. It's pretty good too. It's nice how it has some predefined commands in there. I'd say those are probably the things we like about it the most.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • The PA handles VPN connectivity without missing a beat. We have multiple VPN tunnels in use for redundancy to cloud-based services.
  • The PA has great functionality in supporting failover internet connections, again with the ability to have multiple paths out to our cloud-based services.
  • The PA is updated on the regular with various security updates, we are not concerned with the firewall's ability to see what packets are really flowing across the network. Being able to see beyond just IP and port requests lets you know things are locked down better than traditional firewalls.
  • It is a great overall kit, with URL filtering and other services that fill in the gaps between other solutions without breaking the bank.
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • I have one argument, failover scenario. It's not quite easy. Failover scenario of firewalls. It's sometimes not quite easy to know the issue. But if we open a tech case, a technical case to Cisco, Cisco will help us, it's a little bit con, but we are happy with this product.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • Our specific model is a bit slow and outdated and takes up to 10 minutes to commit a configuration change.
  • Nested security rules would be helpful instead of a linear approach. But rule creation in general is very simple.
  • Documentation gives a very straight forward answer to some items but is very vague in others.
  • Support could be a little better. An issue we had a tech was insistent it was the "other guy" and it ended up being the very latest PAN OS upgrade.
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
Palo Alto Networks
The PA5220s have far exceeded what we have expected out of them. It was a bit of a learning curve coming from another vendor, but everything falls into place now with ease. The capabilities of the solution still surprise us, allowing us to remove other costly hardware and providing a single point of management needed
Read full review
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
Palo Alto Networks
The few aspects of the Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series that could use improvement - such as slow commit times, which I hear they have improved on in the newest models - are vastly outshined by everything else these appliances provide. We have been using the Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls - PA Series appliances for more than 10 years and plan to continue using them for the foreseeable future.
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
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Performance
Cisco
no slowing down, vpn is working fast
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Cisco
Cisco support is not at all suitable for this product, at least. It takes a long for them to help us with our server issues. A lot of the time, the customer support person keeps on redirecting calls to another person. They need to be well versed with the terminologies of the product they are supporting us with. Support needs a lot of improvement. Cisco Fire Linux OS, the operating system behind Cisco Firepower NGFW (formerly Sourcefire), also doesn't receive regular patches. In short, average customer service.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
We've run into a couple undocumented bugs, but that seems to happen with every brand and technology. Any time we've had to engage Palo Alto support they've always been professional, knowledgeable and prompt. In almost all cases we've been able to resolve our issues without having to escalate our tickets.
Read full review
In-Person Training
Cisco
very good
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Online Training
Cisco
was a good training but questions was answered not so good. Training was "Fundamentals of Cisco Firewall Threat Defense and Intrusion Prevention (SFWIPF)".
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
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
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
I think the Cisco product is probably pretty much equal now. I would love to say that Cisco is way more advanced or whatever, but Palo Alto, they just focus solely really on firewalls. And before Cisco came out with the FTD, the ASAs would only do layer four. So that's one of the reasons why that we purchased the Palo Alto is because they would do layer seven. And when we went to the FTDs, since they do layer seven as well, we just wanted to have different layers of security with our firewalls. So we just put the Palo Altos behind the Ciscos in case that there was anything that the Ciscos didn't catch, the Palo Altos would.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
We are using Cisco ASA before in our environment but when it comes to deep scanning & layer 7 security it doesn't have that capability. After using Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall we are using sandboxing & advance malware protection that provides high-level end-user security. Also after implementing it we can easily monitor user-level traffic.
Read full review
Contract Terms and Pricing Model
Cisco
was not involved
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Scalability
Cisco
you can choose up to 50 devices i think thats enough for our organization
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Professional Services
Cisco
was not involved
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • Some patching for zero day exploits have resulted in bugs causing downtime, meaning decision between vuln patching or risk of downtime needs to be discussed.
  • Peace of mind that the device will receive continued upgrades and with a quick turnaround.
  • Ability to use TAC for issues.
  • Ease of hiring candidates with experience in product line.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • Overall, even though the device is very expensive (both hardware and licensing), the product does produce a decent ROI, given that one (or HA pair) of devices can do so many things, such as anti-virus, anti-malware, URL filtering, SSL decryption, SSL VPN, routing, etc.
  • There will definitely be sticker shock when you're renewal comes up annually (or after 3 years), so be sure to look very carefully at the recurring costs of this product, with respect to licensing and hardware/software maintenance.
Read full review
ScreenShots