We performed a comparison between NetCrunch and Pandora FMS 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."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"Reporting on NetCrunch is pretty good. It's very similar to SolarWinds. It's just a different interface. The majority of everything there was beneficial."
"It provides us with proactive monitoring and is very easy to configure and maintain."
"Thanks to its flexibility, I have been able to adapt the tool to our servers and find out quickly how their console works."
"The solution is so lightweight that with only 4GB of ram, it allows keeping track of up to two hundred agents from a single console."
"This solution has screens that are easy to understand and provide a wealth of information."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"It is easy to create your own custom modules if you just know a little bit of scripting. If you have unique requirements, you can just make your own modules. You can even grab checks from other vendors. There are open-source checks for various things such as SMTP, etc. There is a long list of different ones from Nagios. You can just use them, and within seconds, you get yourself a check that is monitoring whatever you need. It is really flexible. I guess that's why they call it Pandora Flexible Monitoring System (FMS). It is reliable. It does the job, and it alerts. It is also surprisingly feature-rich. Our network guy just recently asked about a particular protocol to monitor the bandwidth on the network, which is not a common protocol. When I looked it up, and I found that they cover it. It is very mature for a not-so-known product."
"The most valuable features are auto-discovery and automatic detection of the network topology and network monitoring."
"This product has allowed us to identify and correct certain issues that were affecting our solution."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I didn't care for the role-based, permission-based options, which were not the best."
"This solution requires proper training to get 100% out of it."
"Third-party integration should be improved for some commonly used products."
"I sincerely believe that Pandora needs new ideas for functionality closer to advanced device security monitoring."
"Improvements are needed for server and network discovery, including service-based discovery."
"It would be helpful to include the generation of reports for times that the network was out of service."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
"Pandora could deliver better analytics out of the box. You can work around these limitations with the help of other tools like Grafana. The shortcomings are mostly on the graphical side. The built-in report generators are a bit limited in some areas."
"In the future, we may have double the number of devices, and we do not want to have any issues with performance in the data display."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
NetCrunch is ranked 77th in Network Monitoring Software while Pandora FMS is ranked 28th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews. NetCrunch is rated 8.0, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of NetCrunch writes "A network monitoring platform with a useful reporting feature, but permission-based options could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". NetCrunch is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor and Fortinet FortiSIEM, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our NetCrunch vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Server Monitoring vendors, and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.