We performed a comparison between Azure Cost Management and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Cost Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It encompasses a multitude of specialized services, each with its associated costs and considerations."
"We don't actually use the Azure Cost Management features. We have our own capabilities. We put our own technology on top of Azure as Azure doesn't deliver a really good cost optimization, so our customers come to us to enhance what they're potentially doing inside their Azure platform."
"The interface is good, and it's easy to manage."
"I like the fact that you can set alerts on the predicted cost in Azure Cost Management."
"The most valuable aspect of Azure Cost Management for me is the cost-saving recommendations based on our usage patterns."
"It is easy to log in, and everything is graphical so that you can build on the published resources."
"I like the granularity of the tools."
"The solution helps us diagnose and understand why some resources cost more so that we can fine-tune and reduce the cost."
"My favorite part of the solution is the automation scheduling. Being able to choose when actions happen, and how they happen..."
"Turbonomic helps us right-size virtual machines to utilize the available infrastructure components available and suggest where resources should exist. We also use the predictive tool to forecast what will happen when we add additional compute-demanding virtual machines or something to the environment. It shows us how that would impact existing resources. All of that frees up time that would otherwise be spent on manual calculation."
"The most important feature to us is an objective measurement of VM headroom per cluster. In addition, the ability to check for the right-sizing of VMs."
"I like the analytics that help us optimize compatibility. Whereas Azure Advisor tells us what we have to do, Turbonomic has automation which actually does those things. That means we don't have to be present to get them done and simplifies our IT engineers' jobs."
"I like Turbonomic's built-in reporting. It provides a ton of information out of the box, so I don't have to build panels for the monthly summaries and other reports I need to present to management. We get better performance and bottleneck reporting from this than we do from our older EMC software."
"The biggest value I'm getting out of VMTurbo right now is the complete hands-off management of equalizing the usage in my data center."
"The proactive monitoring of all our open enrollment applications has improved our organization. We have used it to size applications that we are moving to the cloud. Therefore, when we move them out there, we have them appropriately sized. We use it for reporting to current application owners, showing them where they are wasting money. There are easy things to find for an application, e.g., they decommissioned the server, but they never took care of the storage. Without a tool like this, that storage would just sit there forever, with us getting billed for it."
"The notifications saying, "This is a corrective action," even though some of them can be automated, are always welcome to see. They summarize your entire infrastructure and how you can better utilize it. That is the biggest feature."
"The forecasting model can improve Azure Cost Management."
"The dashboard could be improved."
"The solution's technical support should be faster, more knowledgeable, and customer-friendly."
"Azure Cost Management is expensive."
"The product's licensing cost could be improved."
"Cost Management could always provide more details. The more information, the better. They just need to build on what they have now."
"I would like the developers to add more features about migration, like how much it would cost to migrate from, let's say, AWS to Azure."
"Improved integration with other solutions could definitely be beneficial."
"In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings."
"I would love to see Turbonomic analyze backup data. We have had people in the past put servers into daily full backups with seven-year retention and where the disk size is two terabytes. So, every single day, there is a two terabyte snapshot put into a Blob somewhere. I would love to see Turbonomic say, "Here are all your backups along with the age of them," to help us manage the savings by not having us spend so much on the storage in Azure. That would be huge."
"Turbonomic doesn't do storage placement how I would prefer. We use multiple shared storage volumes on VMware, so I don't have one big disk. I have lots of disks that I can place VMs on, and that consumes IOPS from the disk subsystem. We were getting recommendations to provision a new volume."
"The old interface was not the clearest UI in some areas, and could be quite intimidating when first using the tool."
"The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer."
"There are a few things that we did notice. It does kind of seem to run away from itself a little bit. It does seem to have a mind of its own sometimes. It goes out there and just kind of goes crazy. There needs to be something that kind of throttles things back a little bit. I have personally seen where we've been working on things, then pulled servers out of the VMware cluster and found that Turbonomic was still trying to ship resources to and from that node. So, there has to be some kind of throttling or ability for it to not be so buggy in that area. Because we've pulled nodes out of a cluster into maintenance mode, then brought it back up, and it tried to put workloads on that outside of a cluster. There may be something that is available for this, but it seems very kludgy to me."
"They have a long road map when we ask for certain things that will make the product better. It takes time, but that's understandable because there are other things that are higher on the priority list."
"The reporting needs to be improved. It's important for us to know and be able to look back on what happened and why certain decisions were made, and we want to use a custom report for this."
Azure Cost Management is ranked 2nd in Cloud Cost Management with 41 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 1st in Cloud Cost Management with 204 reviews. Azure Cost Management is rated 8.0, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure Cost Management writes "A good, but limited cost information solution with strong analytics but requiring more flexibility in its reporting functionality". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "The solution reduced our operational expenditures and is able to identify points before we even noticed them ". Azure Cost Management is most compared with Cloudability, AWS Savings Plans, VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth, Zabbix and Datadog, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Cisco Intersight, VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth, VMware vSphere and Cloudability. See our Azure Cost Management vs. IBM Turbonomic report.
See our list of best Cloud Cost Management vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Cost 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.
