Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs Meraki MX comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 7, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.3
Fortinet FortiGate users experience cost reduction, improved security, and efficiency, with quick returns despite initial challenges, ensuring satisfaction.
Sentiment score
7.4
CloudGuard improves efficiency and reduces costs by streamlining security management, despite challenges in measuring exact financial returns.
Sentiment score
7.4
Meraki MX streamlines network management with cost savings, quick setup, and reliable performance, offering justified long-term ROI.
Clients are now comfortable and not wasting productive hours on IT support.
We have experienced a positive return on investment by utilizing Fortinet's products.
There's definitely an ROI. Having a centralized way of managing and applying policies across the entire organization always helps.
The value lies in maintaining operational integrity with zero downtime or incidents, facilitating secure, ongoing business operations.
Implementing CloudGuard has resulted in an excellent return on investment over one hundred percent ROI.
The unified policy is comprehensive and helps me to create firewall policies that are shared across all our facilities and plants.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
Fortinet FortiGate's customer service varies globally, with North America and Europe receiving quicker support compared to South Asia.
Sentiment score
7.1
Check Point CloudGuard support is mostly praised for expertise and speed, but needs improvement in response consistency for complex issues.
Sentiment score
8.0
Meraki MX customer service is efficient and accessible, though some users report minor issues with advanced features and escalations.
He explained that it required a command line configuration, as it couldn't be done through the graphical user interface.
I would rate their support for FortiGate a nine out of ten.
They offer very accurate solutions.
They usually respond quite fast, and they are very knowledgeable about what they do.
We had an endless loop of emails trying to fix this, and the suggestion was to reinstall the gateway and do it from scratch, which was not an option at that point because it would leave that specific location without access.
Available twenty-four by seven.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Fortinet FortiGate is scalable, adaptable, and supports dynamic routing, but may face issues with non-Fortinet devices and licensing.
Sentiment score
7.6
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security excels in scalability and integration across cloud platforms like AWS and Azure with auto-scaling.
Sentiment score
8.3
Meraki MX is highly scalable, supporting diverse environments and users efficiently, though hardware upgrades may occasionally be needed.
They scale up really well from smaller models like the FortiGate 40 and 50 to bigger sites with the FortiGate 100 for more throughput - up to enterprise datacenters.
There are many options available, and we can choose the size of the box based on our requirements.
You can choose a cheaper model if you only have 20-30 users, but you will need to spend more money for a FortiGate solution that covers 5,000.
I can deploy it everywhere I need it.
We have transitioned from 1,000 to 500 users without any issue.
We perform minor and major upgrades, and it works seamlessly.
We have Juniper solutions, and I would say the Juniper solutions can scale better, however, this solution is still very scalable.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
Fortinet FortiGate is praised for stability, with updates enhancing reliability, though rare configuration issues may arise under heavy traffic.
Sentiment score
7.9
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is praised for its stability, reliability, and efficiency, handling growth without major disruptions.
Sentiment score
8.2
Meraki MX offers robust stability, though some users face minor VPN and load balancing challenges, requiring occasional reboots.
There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze.
Improper handling of these can lead to a memory surge, a well-known bug that can cause the entire system to freeze.
It is less stable than Palo Alto Networks and Check Point firewalls because there are lots of bugs in the latest firmware.
I have not observed any downtime.
For instance, when we are working on a release and do an upgrade, we start experiencing unexpected issues.
The solution is stable.
 

Room For Improvement

Enhancements are needed in interface stability, SNMPv3 support, integration, user intuitiveness, analytics, cost-effectiveness, and customer support responsiveness.
Users recommend interface improvements, better integration, simplified setup, enhanced support, and advanced features for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security.
Meraki MX requires enhancements in VPN, security, load balancing, integrations, enterprise features, and management, with cost and support concerns.
If I have put 10 GBPS of throughput on a firewall and I enable all of these features available, such as IPS or UTM functionalities, the throughput comes down to 1 GBPS.
By providing an integrated solution, users would have access to all features and functionalities within a single window, eliminating the need to navigate through multiple windows.
Investing in a solution that can accommodate such growth would be more cost-effective than repeatedly purchasing new hardware.
Scalability could be improved as well; needing to purchase a new license each time I want to add a new interface is not ideal.
Better documentation would be welcome.
The user interface could be more intuitive, and the initial setup and configuration can be complex, requiring a technical team.
Data is the only path, so optimization is essential.
 

Setup Cost

Fortinet FortiGate offers cost-effective pricing, often cheaper than competitors, with variations based on hardware and licensing options.
Check Point CloudGuard offers flexible pricing, seen as both cost-effective and expensive, with potential high costs for features and support.
Meraki MX pricing is high but offers value through cloud management, with costs varying by complexity and deployment size.
Secure SD-WAN is free of charge.
The most expensive part is the renewal of the license subscription.
FortiGate is priced lower than Palo Alto.
The pricing and licensing are expensive, costing between seven thousand to eight thousand dollars.
Check Point is expensive, however, with the features and capabilities, I can justify the cost.
It is the highest in the market.
In terms of pricing, I would say it is not the cheapest, but it was comparable to the others.
It is neither expensive nor cheap.
 

Valuable Features

Fortinet FortiGate excels with robust security features, intuitive interface, affordable pricing, supporting VPN, firewall, UTM, and SD-WAN.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security offers centralized management, auto-scaling, and integration, enhancing security with threat prevention and intuitive management.
Meraki MX is praised for its easy setup, cloud management, reliable security, intuitive interface, and efficient network management features.
It's easy to monitor the end-to-end network through the firewall.
The firewall, IPS, and VPN functions are the most valuable features.
FortiGate provides solid protection against viruses, malware, and other threats.
One of the most valuable features is the automated threat prevention, which helps us detect and block potential cyberattacks in real-time, minimizing data breaches.
Centralized management is the feature I like best, resulting in reduced workload and more continuous policy.
Network Security provides us with unified security management across hybrid and cloud as well as on-prem.
We understand that Cisco solutions are very reliable, and we really like the simple management.
Since cybersecurity is my main concern, this type of miscommunication relating to vulnerability blocking is crucial.
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortinet FortiGate
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
318
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (2nd), Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (1st), WAN Edge (1st)
Check Point CloudGuard Netw...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
152
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (8th), Managed Security Services Providers (MSSP) (1st), Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (3rd), Cloud and Data Center Security (6th), WAN Edge (3rd), Unified Threat Management (UTM) (6th)
Meraki MX
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Unified Threat Management (UTM) (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

EhabAli - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient, user-friendly, and affordable
In the past, NSS Labs was utilized to test files and verify the numbers and datasheets. It would be beneficial to have an organization or testing lab that can verify the numbers in our datasheets since changes are frequently made, which can be inconvenient for review. For instance, when comparing different competitors such as Forcepoint, Palo Alto, and Check Point, the throughput or numbers in the datasheet may be lower than the actual numbers. Conversely, Fortinet typically reports very high numbers, but they cannot be replicated in the real world. Therefore, it would be advantageous for them to partner with a neutral testing organization such as NSS Labs to validate these numbers, thus providing more credibility and comfort to everyone regarding the accuracy of the datasheets. For the migration, everyone has a firewall in use and I am selling Fortinet. Typically, I am replacing another firewall. Previously, there was a tool available to convert configurations from one firewall, such as Palo Alto, to Fortinet, but this tool is no longer free. If it could be made free again, it would be very beneficial. This tool shows a lot of promise and is very good. Making it free would help many companies deliver their products in a more efficient and integrated way. It would also be more valuable to include the tool with the firewall package or license instead of having to pay extra for it. Paying extra puts more pressure on small companies to deliver the firewall and complete the configuration, especially if they have hundreds or thousands of policies. It's very painful to move through these policies line by line. The stability has room for improvement. When it comes to Secure SD-WAN, everything is fine. They are going the right way. SD-WAN is very promising. They can provide the SD-WAN solution separately, but they will not take this approach because even the smallest firewall can support the features, so there is no need to have a separate service or appliance. They are following the right steps, and there is nothing to be improved. Feature-wise, I'm really satisfied with the new release, and the features they have added. For now, it's fine.
Martin Raška - PeerSpot reviewer
Unification of security features strengthens network protection
The overall network security is good. It's big-picture, all in one bundle. It's valuable to have everything in one place instead of spreading across different products. Unified security management positively affects a company's security operations. They have one unified view of the security. I can connect multiple gateways to the management and have it in one place. I can have reporting and views in a single pane of glass on the consolidated platform. It's easy to use. The management is the best on the market. It's very easy to work with, read, understand, and navigate. It helps increase our customer's security posture. We can see in some cases CloudGuard improves our customers' posture overall.
David Fartouk - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliablity and simple management facilitates seamless solution integration
We are still using other solutions. We had solutions from HP Aruba and Juniper as well. Eventually, we plan to remove the Aruba and deploy something else, which is basically the Meraki and the Juniper Mist. We are migrating from Aruba to Meraki. We think the Aruba solution was complex despite being stable. Managing it is cumbersome. There were questions about the company's stability.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Unified Threat Management (UTM) solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
22%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Educational Organization
28%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the better NGFW: Fortinet Fortigate or Cisco Firepower?
When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage a...
What is the biggest difference between Sophos XG and FortiGate?
From my experience regarding both the Sophos and FortiGate firewalls, I personally would rather use FortiGate. I know...
What are the biggest technical differences between Sophos UTM and Fortinet FortiGate?
As a solution, Sophos UTM offers a lot of functionality, it scales well, and the stability and performance are quite ...
What do you like most about Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?
The tool's most valuable feature is its management console.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?
Pricing in Jamaica is a major issue, with users often citing it as a reason for not using Check Point.
What needs improvement with Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?
They could improve the documentation. The interface is fine for me since I have been using it for some time.
Fortigate 60d vs. Meraki MX67 for a small company without a dedicated IT Department
We have Meraki Mx devices now, we are looking to replace them. But that is because the Meraki MX platform lacks SSL I...
Which is better - Meraki MX or Cisco ASA Firewall?
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) software is the operating software for the Cisco ASA suite. It supports netw...
What do you like most about Meraki MX?
I am happy with the technical support for the solution. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.
 

Also Known As

FortiGate 60b, FortiGate 60c, FortiGate 80c, FortiGate 50b, FortiGate 200b, FortiGate 110c, FortiGate, Fortinet Firewall
CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point vSEC, CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point Virtual Systems, Check Point CloudGuard Network Security
MX64, MX64W, MX84, MX100, MX400, MX600
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, IBM, Cisco, Dell, HP, Oracle, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Vodafone, Orange, BT Group, Telstra, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, CenturyLink, NTT Communications, Tata Communications, SoftBank, China Mobile, Singtel, Telus, Rogers Communications, Bell Canada, Telkom Indonesia, Telkom South Africa, Telmex, Telia Company, Telkom Kenya
Physicians Choice Laboratory Services, Helvetica Insurance
Hyatt, ONS
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Meraki MX and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.