We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and Nagios XI 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."Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
"From a usability and functionality perspective, Cisco UCS Manager is very good."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"I can deploy something in my 50-odd servers all in one go, in parallel, whereas if I was to do that individually, it could be a nightmare."
"The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system."
"Technical support has been good so far. We haven't had any issues with them. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide our company."
"The reporting functionality will give you any report you want."
"The interface is ergonomic and native. We can use UCS Manager to do all the configurations for the servers, including storage, networking, and all the other components we need inside the fabric. It's simple and flexible."
"Nagios is stable and it's easy to use the monitoring software, which is why we chose this product."
"Though I downplayed the administrative NCC GUI, this is by far the strongest aspect of the Nagios XI product."
"The most valuable feature is its support for different types of devices, where it can use all of the equipment that you need."
"This is a very good solution and it is simple to use, for any company."
"Nagios allows us to configure any device so that we can send pager alerts when people don't have access to emails. It also allows us to schedule downtime and maintenance."
"The most useful aspect of this solution is the ability to customize it for the client agent."
"You want to monitor a specific metric that nobody else has? You can do it even with the most basic of scripting skills, and you can always share it with the vast community of Nagios Exchange."
"The most valuable feature is the dashboard, where I can have a single screen that provides a summary for hundreds of servers."
"The automation within the solution needs to be simplified."
"The interface and the way it is constructed is very complex. They should work to simplify it. It's quite difficult for somebody who doesn't know the product very well. Users should be able to get proficient with it faster. There's definitely room for improvement there."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"Its user interface can be improved. It can be more user-friendly."
"The integration with other solutions could be better. I think Cisco can only integrate using Intersight. There is a second interface available as a SaaS platform, in the cloud, or on-premise. It's based on the Redfish protocol, which is standard for all the B-series servers in the market. We can integrate other solutions using API."
"The installation and upgrade sytems need to be improved."
"Cisco UCS Manager is not a scalable solution because once you have 160 blades, it cannot be expanded more."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"The product does not have SAP monitoring."
"The product's stability could be even better."
"The reporting part should be made simpler. While we can obtain all the reports we need, we always have to create work-arounds to get them."
"The interface could be more user-friendly."
"I would like to be able to extend it to all of our data centers, whether they are in the cloud or not. It would be helpful if I could connect everywhere."
"We'd like to see more integration capabilities."
"There's room for improvement in the visibility, and in the ability to extract information. Stuff like this should be more simple."
"The product uses the backend as Perl and could be modified to a more lightweight solution like what's being offered by other vendors."
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 29th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while Nagios XI is ranked 9th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 54 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while Nagios XI is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nagios XI writes "Great for monitoring IT services infrastructure with nice tools and helpful notifications". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, HPE OneView, Zabbix and Datadog, whereas Nagios XI is most compared with Nagios Core, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wireshark and Icinga. See our Cisco UCS Manager vs. Nagios XI 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.