We performed a comparison between Ardoq and SAP PowerDesigner based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Architecture Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It offers a lot of features in one solution. You would have to get multiple other products to bundle together all of the capabilities that you get in just this product."
"Provides the flexibility to create logical and conceptual data models."
"The feature I found valuable in SAP PowerDesigner is extraction. I also like that my company hasn't faced any issues because of the clear documentation about SAP PowerDesigner."
"The physical database model is definitely the most valuable feature because it describes normalization exactly the way you understand the data, and it deploys it perfectly with open source systems."
"The most valuable features of SAP PowerDesigner are the creation the flow charts and folders. It is a powerful tool."
"SAP PowerDesigner is an excellent tool that does what I need it to do. What I like most about it is that it's stable, fast, and easy to understand."
"The most valuable feature is that it is a very fast reverse engineering process. It does a very expansive comparison."
"It's a stable system. It never crashes."
"Scalability as a standalone system is good, given the information that has been described inside Ardoq. But not the scalability as a third-party system or with integration with other systems. Because in this direction, the scalability is about zero for Ardoq."
"The training environment wasn't very intuitive, but maybe with more use, it will get better."
"Technical support needs improvement."
"There are some minor things that could be easier. We're writing up procedures to bring all the modeling back into one group as this reduces delays in production."
"You have the possibility to complete a connection for abbreviations if you are creating columns or names of the tables. In the Citrix environment, this has been lagging to the point where the PowerDesigner was not usable."
"Connectivity can be improved because it's not very good."
"There should be a better usage of current hardware including multicore CPUs, higher resolutions, and multiple displays."
"Regarding improvements, I suggest enhancing the connection between objects in process and data models. It's crucial to define the structure of objects, especially when dealing with standard frameworks like VMM. There should be better visualization of arrows between BPM and data modeling objects, specifying their structure and impact. For future versions, a feature similar to Bizagi, allowing users to see forms or SQL representations of objects, would be valuable for demonstrating and presenting project details to stakeholders."
"The solution itself does not need to be improved. However, they could add support for different languages."
"The data governance should be improved, like ER/Studio."
Ardoq is ranked 12th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 2 reviews while SAP PowerDesigner is ranked 5th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 34 reviews. Ardoq is rated 7.6, while SAP PowerDesigner is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Ardoq writes "Provides stable performance and scalability but not intuitive for data modeling". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP PowerDesigner writes "Effective in terms of validating everything, but sometimes they don't allow us some flexibility and GUI could improve". Ardoq is most compared with LeanIX, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, MEGA HOPEX, BiZZdesign HoriZZon and OrbusInfinity, whereas SAP PowerDesigner is most compared with erwin Data Modeler by Quest, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Visio, IDERA ER/Studio and LeanIX. See our Ardoq vs. SAP PowerDesigner report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management 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.