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 is easy to log in, and everything is graphical so that you can build on the published resources."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the fact that it's extremely customizable. It makes it very flexible in terms of usage."
"My organization benefits from the tool's performance and time-saving features."
"The best thing about Azure Cost Management is the cost analysis functionality because it provides regular alerts."
"Our customers use it and like it."
"The interface is good, and it's easy to manage."
"It encompasses a multitude of specialized services, each with its associated costs and considerations."
"The initial setup process is easy."
"Rightsizing is valuable. Its recommendations are pretty good."
"We have seen a 30% performance improvement overall."
"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."
"In our organization, optimizing application performance is a continuous process that is beyond human scale. We would not be able to do the number of actions that Turbonomic takes on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. It is humanly impossible with the little micro adjustments that it can make. That is a huge differentiator. If you just figure each action could take anywhere very conservatively from five to 10 minutes to act upon, then you multiply that out by thousands of actions every month, it is easily something where you could say, "I am saving a couple of FTEs.""
"The tool provides the ability to look at the consumption utilization over a period of time and determine if we need to change that resource allocation based on the actual workload consumption, as opposed to how IT has configured it. Therefore, we have come to realize that a lot of our workloads are overprovisioned, and we are spending more money in the public cloud than we need to."
"The feature for optimizing VMs is the most valuable because a number of the agencies have workloads or VMs that are not really being used. Turbonomic enables us to say, 'If you combine these, or if you decide to go with a reserve instance, you will save this much.'"
"I only deal with the infrastructure side, so I really couldn't speak to more than load balancing as the most valuable feature for me. It provides specific actions that prevent resource starvation. It always keeps things in perfect balance."
"Turbonomic has helped optimize cloud operations and reduced our cloud costs significantly. Overall, we are at about 40 percent savings, and we spend about three million a year just in Azure. It reduces the size of the VMs, putting them into the right template for usage. People don't realize that you don't have to future-proof a virtual machine in Azure. You just need to build it for today. As the business or service grows, you can scale up or out. About 90 percent of all the costs that we've reduced has been from sizing machines appropriately."
"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."
"It can be difficult to determine the cost associated with certain resources as it relies on a tagging progress. This means we need to drill down billing reports to highlight and fix missing tags."
"If it worked better with other cloud providers it would be better."
"Be wary of unnecessary costs."
"The solution could improve its APIs to access the customer application."
"The response time of customer support can be improved."
"Stability is an area in the solution that lacks in certain areas. So, it needs to be improved."
"We have encountered delays in support."
"The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines."
"Since the introduction of a HTML 5 based interface, our main - but minor - criticism of a less than intuitive operation managers' GUI would be the area of improvement."
"Enhanced executive reporting standard with the tool beyond the reports that can be created today. Something that can easily be used with upper management on a monthly or quarterly basis to show the impact to our environment."
"They could add a few more reports. They could also be a bit more granular. While they have reports, sometimes it is hard to figure out what you are looking for just by looking at the date."
"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."
"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."
"The GUI and policy creation have room for improvement. There should be a better view of some of the numbers that are provided and easier to access. And policy creation should have it easier to identify groups."
"While the product is fairly intuitive and easy to use once you learn it, it can be quite daunting until you have undergone a bit of training."
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.
