We performed a comparison between ScienceLogic and SolarWinds NPM 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 flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"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."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"The power flow is great."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"It combines and presents information from many different sources, giving a corporate-wide vision on a single pane of glass."
"I love the GUI. Almost everything is accessible through the web interface. It is very user-friendly. It is easy to drag and drop resources wherever you want them."
"The most important feature is reporting. The reports that are generated are useful and they save a lot of time with respect to monitoring."
"The biggest thing for me is that it provided enough information for me to monitor. It alerts and provides you with the information you need."
"With just three modules, I can monitor server performance (whether it’s a VM, in the cloud, or an on-premises server."
"It's easy to understand, even if you are not too technical."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its graphical interface and reports."
"It is very extensible with 'SWQL' and APIs to where we are beginning to integrate it with network automation."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"I would like to see out-of-the-box standard dashboards for common services."
"From a performance perspective, it needs to improve a lot."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"Addressing duplicate IPs: There is the ability to edit the DB and fix this, but adding some logic to understand them would be a plus."
"There isn't support available to us as they don't offer support in our country."
"An area for improvement in SolarWinds NPM is the short retention period. Currently, it's just for seven days of data, which is very low, making it hard for my organization to keep that data. SolarWinds recommended a seven-day retention period, but my organization needs a fourteen-day data retention period. Hence, I'd like an increase in the retention period or the database limit in SolarWinds NPM because you can't go back to the data for any investigation if seven days have passed. Another area for improvement in SolarWinds NPM is the database, which needs to be a bit more mature. I want a modified database in the next release of SolarWinds NPM. I'd also like more options added to groups because, currently, it's very limited."
"SolarWinds NPM can be very slow at times. The database optimization can be done to improve the product performance."
"It is difficult for stakeholders to translate technical requirements, which results in difficulties selecting a platform or implementing a solution."
"The evaluation time for the product is too short especially for large corporations."
"An area for improvement would be the use of modular licenses, which are not practical for big clients."
"The scalability can be better."
"My team has had a lot of issues with support."
ScienceLogic is ranked 14th in Network Monitoring Software with 42 reviews while SolarWinds NPM is ranked 4th in Network Monitoring Software with 147 reviews. ScienceLogic is rated 8.6, while SolarWinds NPM is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds NPM writes "High-level, comprehensive, and proactive monitoring in a user-friendly interface". ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, Datadog, Zabbix and ServiceNow Discovery, whereas SolarWinds NPM is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, ManageEngine OpManager, ThousandEyes and Meraki Dashboard. See our ScienceLogic vs. SolarWinds NPM report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.