Cisco Firepower 2100 Series

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Cisco offers the Firepower 2100 Series NGFW, designed to allow businesses to gain resiliency through superior security with sustained performance. The Firepower 2100 Series has a dual multicore CPU architecture that optimizes firewall, cryptographic, and threat inspection functions simultaneously, to achieve security doesn’t come at the expense of network performance.N/A
Pricing
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Editions & Modules
Firepower 2100
3,000-20,000
per appliance
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Free Trial
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Features
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Firewall
Comparison of Firewall features of Product A and Product B
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
8.4
Ratings
3% below category average
Identification Technologies7.00 Ratings
Content Inspection9.00 Ratings
Policy-based Controls9.00 Ratings
Active Directory and LDAP6.00 Ratings
Firewall Management Console10.00 Ratings
Reporting and Logging9.00 Ratings
VPN10.00 Ratings
High Availability10.00 Ratings
Stateful Inspection8.00 Ratings
Proxy Server6.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Small Businesses
pfSense
pfSense
Score 9.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Quantum Firewalls and Security Gateways
Quantum Firewalls and Security Gateways
Score 9.6 out of 10
Enterprises
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
Palo Alto Networks Virtualized Next-Generation Firewalls - VM Series
Score 10.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Likelihood to Recommend
5.5
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Firepower 2100 Series
Likelihood to Recommend
The Cisco [Firepower] 2100 [Series] is an easy sell for anyone looking. You already know Cisco excels in the security department, but now that firepower lives right on the box and inline with the rest of the firewall data flow you can save yourself a lot of time and headaches. Unless you cant quite afford Cisco's 2100 line, there's not much reason to go with the competition.
Read full review
Pros
  • Nice HTML5 web interface instead of the old java client
  • Many added features over the ASA
  • Firepower built in and faster than before
Read full review
Cons
  • Career-wise very familiar with the ASAs, you know, the previous gen firewalls, Pyxis, ASAs, the CHA. As far as being intuitive, those seem to be far more intuitive to learn and figure out what the features and changes and config management, all that stuff is. With Firepower, it's a learning curve and I feel like I have quite a bit of experience with it, and so does my team, but feels like it's not as intuitive, and trying to make changes just always seems harder for some reason. We've gone to some Cisco security training and all that, but even then it's just harder to work with. The other big thing is, and this is a big gripe of mine, I suppose, that on any other firewall, when we have various different manufacturers, if you make a change, you know, a simple change object, object name gets changed or object is deleted or whatever the simplest of change is, it gets implemented instantly.
  • With the Firepower system, you have to deploy the change and it'll take about six or seven minutes for the change to actually take, which is insanely different than any other platform where that change is instantaneous. So let's say if I'm making seven different changes for a troubleshooting job I don't know which one of the seven is gonna fix it, I do one by one by one. I'm like, oh, let me try one change, one second, change, third change, four changes. It's going to take seven deploys. And seven deploys mean it's gonna take an hour of just deploy time. So that is a big, big gripe
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • It's keeping threats out like a firewall should. Definitely cost wise it is at a higher cost center than other alternatives. Especially when it comes to licensing. Cisco is generally the higher, for perhaps, definitely for good reason, right? I mean, definitely positive impact as far as working as it should that's at cost.
Read full review
ScreenShots