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

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
24th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (49th), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (13th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (39th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is 3.3%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 is 1.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)3.3%
ExtraHop Reveal(x) 3601.5%
Other95.2%
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer373227 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Marketing strengths shine but regaining user trust needs significant effort
There are numerous things that could be improved about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) to get it back on track. Sollution for small branches: when we have to connect a lot very small branches (or sometimes only an ATM) we need something small, with LTE and with reasonable price. Cisco response is SDWAN but it is not always the case. Recently Cisco released some small firewalls but I have not tried them yet. Central management with FMC is a very good idea, but sometimes local management or monitoring is helpfull. With Cisco You have to decide: central or local. You cannot have both. Regarding usability, when you commit configuration on Cisco, it sometimes takes very long. Commits also take some time for the competition, but Cisco is definitely lagging behind the rest in this respect. Last but not least, for me as a professional is lack of CLI. With CLI, I can configure every firewall on the market except Cisco. CLI is very important in professional working, and IMHO it was an unwise decision by Cisco to remove it. Graphical interfaces are very nice, but when you've got thousands of objects in a big installation and have to configure many things, CLI is a much faster way to do it.
Maksym Toporkov - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Research And Development at Quipu GmbH
A competitive choice for network detection and response with exceptional user interface, ease of implementation and minimal false positives
The NDR feature analyzes network traffic, creating records with connection details. While these records offer insights, there's a limitation in investigating payloads directly. ExtraHop provides an option for an additional server to save payloads, but its temporary storage has constraints. Unlike some competitors, it lacks an automatic payload-saving feature for each detection, presenting an improvement opportunity. Suggested enhancement involves the main sensor prompting payload storage for specific detections, streamlining the investigation process, and contributing to a more efficient workflow. A drawback includes packet storage limitations for payload data, necessitating timely extraction for thorough investigations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is stable. This is one of the good things in Firepower. Especially if we use ESE with it."
"We have found the product to be quite stable."
"The security intelligence in the product is the best feature and give us all the information that we need in our network."
"We are satisfied with the technical support."
"The most valuable features are the intrusion detection ones."
"The most valuable feature would be the IPS is very important in Cisco Firepower because I can configure deep configuration in IPS and tuning."
"I am satisfied with Cisco's technical support, but I would rate it six out of ten."
"It has increased our security posture and has contributed substantially to our security maturity by stopping threats."
"It stands out for its intuitive and efficient user interface, robust detection capabilities with minimal false positives, and the ability to handle encrypted traffic, making it a valuable asset for network security and management."
"It is very easy to collect and handle data in ExtraHop Reveal(X) Cloud. Integration with Big Data is also easy. Many of our customers integrate it with Big Data platforms like Splunk or Elastic. It is also easy to handle and easy to understand."
"It is scalable."
"Their technical support is more effective and of better quality than other competitors."
 

Cons

"The main problem with Firepower is the time between deployment and configuration."
"The inclusion of bandwidth management features would improve this product."
"The inclusion of bandwidth management features would improve this product."
"Scalability I would say, it has some limitations in the large deployment."
"I think that some initiation scripts might be helpful because they would make the configuration easier and more user-friendly for customers."
"The solution would be better if it offered customers more integrations and more signatures."
"More flexibility with the dashboards is needed because some of them are not fully developed."
"My opinion is that this solution should improve the pricing."
"They can include integration with SAP. Currently, no vendor provides network performance monitoring in the SAP market. It is a very big market. We have around 400 customers for SAP in Korea. In the USA, there are more than 10,000 customers."
"Their professional service can be improved."
"A drawback includes bucket storage limitations for payload data, necessitating timely extraction for thorough investigations."
"There needs to be more support."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is pricey, but worth it."
"The price of Cisco NGIPS could be reduced. It is more expensive than other solutions."
"There are licensing fees depending on the features that you are using."
"Cisco NGIPS is an expensive product."
"In our company, we know that the price of Cisco products is high, especially for its switches, routers and IOS. The price of Cisco products may be twice its original price if you plan to extend some of its features."
"It is highly priced but competitive regarding features and support services."
"This is a very affordable product."
"The cost of the license depends on the level of support that you have with Cisco."
"When compared to other solutions, it aligns with the market average, indicating a competitive pricing level."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
Educational Organization
8%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise27
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco NGIPS?
I would rate the price for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) as high.
What needs improvement with Cisco NGIPS?
I am aware that we are not measuring some metrics or tracking access through Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS). In my opinion, Cisco could improve the Web GUI for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS).
What is your primary use case for Cisco NGIPS?
Our main use case for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is in-line traffic control, and we are using IPS in an in-line mode.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Sourcefire NGIPS, Firepower NGIPS
ExtraHop Reveal(X) Cloud, Reveal(X) Cloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

American Electric Power, Huntington Bank, Keycorp, Nationwide, Transunion, Marriott, Inova Health, Ford, Thomson Reuters, Dow Chemical, Equifax, Chevron, Walmart, Coca Cola
Wizards of the Coast
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs. ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.