We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Cisco SD-WAN vs. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco SD-WAN vs. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,529 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"This solution comes with comprehensive technical support.""The most valuable feature is the ease of central management.""So far, the feature that I like best is the policy configuration manager.""The deployment is quite simple and straightforward.""Installation is easy.""There is minimum blind space in this solution.""The first part that we like is that we can reuse certain hardware, which is a valuable asset. You can use hardware SKUs that already exist in the network. The second part that we like is the integration with the cloud and the measurement of the cloud's quality. These are the two values that this solution gives as compared to other implementations that we have seen.""I like the feature that lets you transfer from old devices to new devices without changing the hardware and subscription."

More Cisco SD-WAN Pros »

"Forcepoint is a complete package because it has network and systems applications. Other firewalls are only for the network.""The support is great. They also have very good categorization. It's very good. It captures a lot of threats.""Technical support has been quite helpful in the past.""Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is very simple, easy to use, and flexible.""The most valuable feature is the console management.""I don't have anything bad to say about the product. I absolutely love it.""The most valuable feature of this solution is the support.""It is a scalable product. I know a customer who has deployed more than 4,000 firewalls in a single deployment."

More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pros »

Cons
"It would be very helpful if we had better access to a knowledge base, or online documentation, to help both us and our customers learn to use this solution.""The initial setup could be a bit less complex.""Cisco's router and voice gateway has not been available since the launch of SD-WAN.""One of the major areas that Cisco can improve on with their SD-WAN offering is their security features. When compared with Fortinet, who have what they call their 'security pillars' (e.g. firewall and security features built-in to their SD-WAN solutions), Cisco generally comes up short. With Cisco, if you need a security component, you have to pay more to get it done. So if they could add more security features that come part and parcel with their existing solutions, then I think Cisco could be very aggressive in the market.""I would like them to add some more SD-WAN ports. We have seen one implementation where there were four ISPs. Currently, we have a maximum of two ports for ISP in this device. Therefore, we cannot connect directly, and we need other switches. There should be some option to have more than two ports for SD-WAN.""The bandwidth limitations would be good to remove, but it is a policy and license situation for Cisco because the cost is very high. It would be good to have OTP implemented with VRF. It can have support for EIGRP Over the Top (OTP) VRF. I saw some limitations in regards to the VRF protocol and the advertisement between VRF configuration. EIGRP Over the Top basically was quite limited with the VRF configuration. If you wanted to do rollback in VRF by using the EIGRP OTP protocol, the formation was not populated across. Cisco got back and confirmed that it is a configuration that I need to wait for until the next release, which is going to happen in one year. Cisco documentation is not the way it used to be before. It just gives an easy way to configure, but it doesn't go into the details of the configuration. The information that you need is there, but sometimes you want to go further and get more information, but the information is quite limited. It would be good to cover a few business cases or configuration cases. They used to be there in the past.""Compresson deduplication should be added.""Some competitors are much faster in providing out-of-the-box solutions, more innovative solutions. In terms of innovation, in many cases, they're lagging behind."

More Cisco SD-WAN Cons »

"They need to work on stability, it has not been the best in our experience.""The solution needs to build upon its network functionality. It needs to be a bit smarter.""Making this solution easier to use would be an improvement.""They need to increase the local support here. There are also some bugs or fixes on which they need to work. They very well know about these bugs. In terms of licensing, I would like them to either increase the number of features in a single license or make licensing more flexible.""My team is looking for more throughput and better integration with our security framework.""The network interface could be better, and it could be cheaper.""The security features need to be improved.""Forcepoint is a little difficult to configure compared to its competitors."

More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"The license model is too complex with too many flavors and options. You might not be able to see it from an end user's point of view, but from a telco point of view, their license model is too complex. They should have a flexible license model. If you want to have good pricing, you need to buy it for a two-year, four-year, or five-year license immediately. Some other vendors have much more flexible license models.""The costs are a bit on the high side.""Cisco is more expensive than FortiGate.""The pricing of this solution is very expensive.""The price is high.""You have to pay between 3000 and 10,000 euros, or something in that range. The core switches Nexus cost me between 10,000 and 20,000 euros.""We pay for the Cisco Customer Care support, which is a couple of hundred dollars.""It's expensive. If you compare Cisco with Fortinet and Juniper, you'll find that Cisco is more expensive than other vendors."

More Cisco SD-WAN Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Forcepoint is very expensive but it's really secure.""It could be cheaper like Fortinet.""We would love to take other solution from Forcepoint, but unfortunately the price is too high. That's why we are not considering using Forcepoing for our proxy and DLB. They have a very good DLB, but the matter in the end is the cost.""The pricing should be more competitive against other vendors in the market.""I consider Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall's price to be good.""We have just a subscription for the cloud, and this license is great. The license is so good.""Everything in Forcepoint comes with an individual license, which is kind of a problem. In our last meeting, they said that it may change at the beginning of 2021, and they will try to merge some licenses together. Customers will get more features than what they got previously. We will wait and see.""The training that they offer to their end-customers. It's quite expensive, I believe it costs roughly $11,000"

More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions solutions are best for your needs.
554,529 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Load balancing is a feature that allows us to take the best of our links and distribute the load intelligently, always with an eye on the end-customer experience.
Top Answer: It is not the cheapest solution on the market, however, without a doubt, it is one of the options that best handles complex topologies. Therefore there is a need to know more accurately what the… more »
Top Answer: It is transversal to all industries. What is important is to work on the costs of the solution. On the technical side, manufacturer-independent solutions should be able to handle different topologies… more »
Top Answer: I like the IPS. IPS is the master feature. I depend on the firewall and sandbox.
Top Answer: We have just a subscription for the cloud, and this license is great. The license is so good.
Top Answer: Management could be better. They can improve the management. I think all our customers can't accept firewalls that have standalone management. So, they prefer Fortinet or Palo Alto. But overall… more »
Ranking
Views
19,449
Comparisons
15,772
Reviews
37
Average Words per Review
612
Rating
7.9
Views
5,766
Comparisons
4,569
Reviews
16
Average Words per Review
393
Rating
8.0
Comparisons
Also Known As
Viptela, Cisco vEdge Cloud Router
Forcepoint NGFW, Stonesoft Next Generation Firewall, McAfee Network Security Platform, Intel Security Network Security Platform
Learn More
Overview

Deploy software-defined WAN without compromising the application experience.

Forcepoint Stonesoft Next Generation Firewall protects enterprise networks with high-performance "intelligence aware" security supported by real-time updates. This enables Stonesoft to deliver the industry's best defense against advanced evasions, alone with complete next-generation firewall protection when and where you need it - at remote sites, branch offices, data centers, and the network edge.
Offer
Learn more about Cisco SD-WAN
Learn more about Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall
Sample Customers
Doyle Research, Ashton Metzler & Associates
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider50%
Transportation Company10%
Real Estate/Law Firm10%
Computer Software Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider39%
Computer Software Company22%
Manufacturing Company4%
Government4%
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider36%
Computer Software Company27%
Energy/Utilities Company9%
University9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider27%
Computer Software Company23%
Government7%
Energy/Utilities Company4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business47%
Midsize Enterprise16%
Large Enterprise37%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business22%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise59%
REVIEWERS
Small Business62%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise23%
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco SD-WAN vs. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,529 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Cisco SD-WAN is ranked 2nd in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 41 reviews while Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 5th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 19 reviews. Cisco SD-WAN is rated 8.0, while Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco SD-WAN writes "Stable, cutting-edge, and robust". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Good console management, but the interface is not user-friendly and application filtering needs finer granularity". Cisco SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, VMware SD-WAN, Versa FlexVNF, Meraki SD-WAN and Citrix SD-WAN, whereas Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention, Darktrace, pfSense and Cisco ASA Firewall. See our Cisco SD-WAN vs. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall report.

See our list of best Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions vendors and best WAN Edge vendors.

We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.