We performed a comparison between Centreon and ManageEngine OpManager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"E-mail alert notifications are valuable."
"It is decentralized, which is better, because you can reduce the load from a single system. Also, you get a better view because it's more independent. Then, for the management, it's nice because they have one central system. With that, they can manage all the other systems, as well. This means they don't have to configure each system by system. They can configure it from one single interface."
"You can concentrate and orchestrate several other solutions from other vendors. You can consolidate those solutions all in one place, then maintain and monitor from that single point. This creates ease of use. It is a very powerful solution from this point of view."
"In addition, the flexibility, customizability, and analytics of Centreon's dashboards are all very good. The dashboards help us see the whole network map, and that is quite valuable for us. In addition, the dashboards have helped to improve our visibility and ability to proactively ensure the right data is available at the right time... The flexibility has given us the ability to add in our own monitoring metrics and that has been quite interesting and very useful for us."
"We use the remote server functionality on some customer sites, because you can see an independent view and are not dependent on a single connection. If you have branch offices or bigger office outside your headquarters, you can use remote servers because if the connection is broken or disrupted, then remote server will obtain a view of your environment and server availability. This is a good point against using other solutions. Because with other solutions, you don't have this feature. Then, you will be blind if you have this type of a situation."
"What I like most about Centreon is that it is very flexible and customizable, based on the user and/or business needs. Centreon is very flexible when it comes to monitoring parameters. We can use scripts found on the internet or scripts created by our infra/apps team. Also, the data visualization features are very simple and straightforward, yet very informative."
"We have all our tickets inside Centreon in real-time and can monitor a lot of ELP and CLN in real-time for application purposes."
"It supports active monitoring so we don't have to use traps. From time to time traps are not very useful because we never know if they are actually working or not. The reporting part is also valuable as are the event logs. Using them we can check right away if something has had a hiccup."
"Monitoring is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The solution offers very good integration capabilities."
"Some of the useful features are NetFlow and analytics."
"The alerting feature has improved our organization. We can create multiple alerts and refine them to how we need to use them."
"The application monitoring is the solution's most valuable feature."
"It is easy to use and deploy."
"The features we found most valuable in ManageEngine OpManager are the probe server and reporting because they're pretty good features."
"It helps us a lot for monitoring our servers in one console, instead of going to individual servers."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"There is room for improvement in the area of artificial intelligence. The product gives us a lot of information, but it's only information. We want the product to do more auto-remediation."
"Centreon supports officially 10,000 services per poller. That is not much for larger customers, because this limit is reached very quickly. We use it with three times the limit without any problems, but Centreon says, "Okay, we are only supporting it with 10,000 services." We are aware that increasing the limit has different impacts because they need to support it. However, for most customers, it would be be very good if they could increase the limit of services."
"I would like to see an improvement of the communication with big data systems, because Centreon is a monitoring system. In our point of view, Centreon should be a part of a source for a big data system, not a big data system itself. So, it should be easier to add data from the Centreon system to a big data system. For example, it should be able to teach machine learning."
"It is necessary to improve service monitoring of database services in the free version."
"Improvements I would like to see include a discovery solution, better reports, and end-to-end monitoring."
"Centreon introduced network discovery in the most recent update. However, it doesn't work well. Our previous monitoring tool could discover networking equipment on the network and identify the relationships between the devices."
"Improvements are needed in the area of cloud monitoring, as that's a newer feature."
"Centreon needs to improve the granularity of the data as well as the graphical data. It would also be better to if there was improvement to the filtering/grouping system as well as the creation of views."
"I would like to see more enhancements made to the product."
"It would be great if there were some sort of artificial intelligence feature which would help us make improvements in the network once we find an issue, and do it automatically."
"It is sometimes difficult to manage the user interface. It can get very complicated."
"ManageEngine OpManager could improve the default dashboards that are available. We are not able to customize them easily and they do not give us the information we need unless we customize them. You need to have the technical knowledge to be able to do it, the customization should be easier."
"The main area for improvement for ManageEngine OpManager is its performance."
"The two views into the system are very good but could be extended to further customization to fit the need of end users in a variety of roles."
"The storage level monitoring needs improvement. It needs storage level monitoring on the server itself. That feature is lacking right now."
"The licensing model is confusing."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Centreon is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 27 reviews while ManageEngine OpManager is ranked 13th in Network Monitoring Software with 44 reviews. Centreon is rated 8.6, while ManageEngine OpManager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Centreon writes "Proactive reporting guides our NOC on what needs to be fixed, saving them time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ManageEngine OpManager writes "Helps us monitor all the infrastructure in our company but UI monitoring is not practical". Centreon is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios Core, Icinga and ServiceNow IT Operations Management, whereas ManageEngine OpManager is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and ScienceLogic. See our Centreon vs. ManageEngine OpManager report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
