We performed a comparison between DX Performance Management and DX Spectrum based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two DX NetOps 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."
"Scalability is the reason we bought the product to begin with. It was designed from the ground up for carrier-grade services, and we are in effect a MSP ourselves. So we were really interested in looking at something to be able to handle the multi-tenancy and scale as large as possible. This was the only solution that we really considered at that level."
"What is most useful is visibility."
"The most valuable feature of DX Performance Management is the quick way we can collect data without putting much effort. They have a lot of customization and features with the solution internally and out of the box. We can discover the device, and start collecting information. For example, if the device is available, we can receive the CPU and memory utilization, and the interface optimization is simple and very fast to implement."
"When devices are having performance issues, it proactively build dashboards which allow us to go and do health checks, and resolve problems before they become an issue."
"Great dashboards and good integration with other solutions."
"One feature I like about CA Performance Management is the certification of the devices."
"It gave us one location, one place to do all of group administration, and to build dashboards, and device administration, inventory counts... it really reduced our overall administrative overhead."
"There is a good amount of vendor certification which comes with the product. That's all factory-loaded, no need to load any custom-made files. Most of the metrics are calibrated and captured from the devices based on the defaults available from vendor certification."
"Scalability is a highly rated feature of this solution. It is better than some of the other tools that I've used in terms of scalability. We scaled it to tens of thousands of devices."
"It covers a lot of different types of hardware. It can do a lot and saves us time."
"Some of the most valuable features are it's highly scalable, the carrier is great, and if something has SNMP, it can monitor it. It's a great network fault management solution."
"The solution's most valuable features are its integration with Broadcom tools and scalability."
"The fault management is perfect."
"The most valuable feature is the event correlation mechanism."
"The tool is very mature, and its valuable features are monitoring and configuration management."
"The monitoring just comes to us: "Oh, there's something wrong with that machine." It tells us. There are some 50,000 machines or so, all doing different things. And if they go down we hear about it."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Since we are out of registered IP space, we are moving to ipv6 and we expect our vendors to move with us, and they have not delivered yet."
"Install is done as root, which is a security no-no, and the database IO requirements were not stated correctly, which lead to a year of instability."
"CA PM can be complex to build and configure. Creating the folders / groups / sites required establishing many rule sets."
"I'm not a fan of many extra features since they usually burden the software and reduce its reliability."
"There are some areas in the technology right now, like with VMs, where we are lacking with our abilities to get inside the VM to monitor traffic within the machine."
"For CA PM, there should be a way of easily migrating the reports coming from eHealth going to CA Performance Center, since CA PC is replacing eHealth."
"Policies could be improved."
"We experience disconnections between the solutions own components."
"I would like to see them eliminate the Java console. The user interface for this is a Java applet that runs on your desktop, and it is very problematic for us."
"Needs better integration with all the other products in the Agile suite of tools; anything they could do to make that less complex, would be great."
"DX Spectrum needs to incorporate faster support."
"From the users perspective the looks and feel of dashboards of Spectrum would be easier to use and for understanding as APM will be in 10.5 version which we saw in CA World."
"OS monitoring needs to be better developed, as well as their services, e.g., cluster monitoring, URLs, etc."
"I think the management or configuration of devices needs some improvement."
"Its visualization can be improved. It doesn't have a very advanced GUI. It is very basic and simple, but it does work."
"There should be better integration with other Broadcom products, like network performance manager. Currently, for every part of a product, you need a separate server environment. You have something for Spectrum, you have something for network performance, and you have something for NetFlow. There are a lot of islands and server farms with different technologies. They should be redeveloped to get one platform for all."
DX Performance Management is ranked 2nd in DX NetOps with 31 reviews while DX Spectrum is ranked 1st in DX NetOps with 115 reviews. DX Performance Management is rated 8.2, while DX Spectrum is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of DX Performance Management writes "The vertical database loads faster than any other product available". On the other hand, the top reviewer of DX Spectrum writes "Comprehensive alerts, beneficial overall network viability, and scalability not limited". DX Performance Management is most compared with OmniPeek and SolarWinds AppOptics, whereas DX Spectrum is most compared with DX NetOps, Zabbix, SolarWinds NPM, Cisco DNA Center and OpenText Network Node Manager i. See our DX Performance Management vs. DX Spectrum report.
See our list of best DX NetOps vendors and best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all DX NetOps 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.
