We performed a comparison between Cisco Intersight and ScienceLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We enjoy having an inside view of all the data centers and all the EdgeX nodes within a single portal rather than going into the EdgeX connections one by one."
"Intersight can validate our environment."
"Scalable portfolio of services for remote device management, with good cloud integration. It's also easy to set up."
"Our organization uses Cisco Intersight since it helps manage our physical infrastructure."
"Provides an overall view using a single portal."
"I like Intersight because of the integration with HashiCorp, Kubernetes, and each cloud because Intersight is the IO module."
"The product has good integration."
"Cisco Intersight has valuable features for workflow automation and inventory administration."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"Its ITSM and EMS combination is really amazing. There is no need to purchase two products, one for ITSM and a second for EMS/NMS."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"Power packs."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"The product's setup should be easier."
"An area for improvement in Cisco Intersight is automation. It needs more automation capabilities. Apart from enhanced automation, I want Cisco Intersight to integrate with third-party monitoring tools in its next release."
"The solution needs some enhancement in order to build the cluster in two nodes."
"Cisco Intersight needs some improvement in terms of stability. Hybrid cloud management and proper hyperscaler tie-up are other areas for improvement."
"In the future, the solution needs to plan on an extension to cover a broader range of objects since, at present, there are some Cisco devices within the range of Intersight UCS that it can't manage."
"It's a very complex solution."
"The product could be easy to use."
"The usability must be better."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"I would like to see out-of-the-box standard dashboards for common services."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"They should improve their support process and add chat."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
Cisco Intersight is ranked 26th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 10 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 42 reviews. Cisco Intersight is rated 7.8, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Intersight writes "Helps know whether a solution is deployed correctly, but the automation capabilities are difficult to use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". Cisco Intersight is most compared with Cisco UCS Manager, HPE OneView, IBM Turbonomic, VMware Aria Automation and VMware Aria Operations, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix. See our Cisco Intersight vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.