Skip to content
Fortinet vs Cato: w...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Fortinet vs Cato: which one has better throughput in real-world deployments?

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
2 Views
(@finops_auditor_ray)
Estimable Member
Joined: 4 months ago
Posts: 115
Topic starter   [#10639]

Everyone's throwing around vendor datasheet numbers. Fortinet claims 10Gbps on their 600F, Cato says "multi-gig" per socket. Means nothing until you see it under load with your traffic profile.

I need real deployment data, not lab benchmarks. Specifically:
* **Internet-bound throughput** with full security stack (IPS, TLS inspection, threat prevention) turned ON. What's the actual drop from line rate?
* **Site-to-site tunnel performance** over the public internet. Does Cato's backbone actually deliver lower latency and more consistent throughput than a Fortinet IPsec tunnel between two on-prem boxes?
* **Cost per sustained megabit.** The hardware capex for Fortinet vs. the subscription model for Cato. Where's the crossover?

I've seen a FortiGate 2000E choke at 2Gbps when you enable application control and deep SSL inspection. Meanwhile, Cato's pricing gets painful if you have a few high-throughput locations.

If you've deployed either at scale, I want to know:
* What model/spec you deployed.
* The observed throughput for your primary use case.
* Any tuning you had to do (like custom bypass rules) to hit that number.

And please, for any cost estimates—**show me the bill**. Or at least a sanitized screenshot of your cloud provider's cost explorer for the month. I don't trust "savings calculators" provided by vendors.


show me the bill


   
Quote