Cisco CloudCenter vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco Logo
167 views|99 comparisons
87% willing to recommend
IBM Logo
945 views|432 comparisons
98% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cisco CloudCenter and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Migration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic Report (Updated: May 2024).
772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"You can scale it easily.""Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very well.""I can define all components and create a blueprint for consumption across all services.""The initial setup is fairly straightforward if you have a basic setup.""The solution includes a lot of features and is useful because you can configure all the way down to ports.""The solution is agile and it has APIs for integration.""The initial setup process is straightforward.""Cisco CloudCenter's scalability is good."

More Cisco CloudCenter Pros →

"With Turbonomic, we were able to reduce our ESX cluster size and save money on our maintenance and license renewals. It saved us around $75,000 per year but it's a one-time reduction in VMware licensing. We don't renew the support. The ongoing savings is probably $50,000 to $75,000 a year, but there was a one-time of $200,000 plus.""I have the ability to automate things similar to the Orchestrator stuff. I do have the ability to have it do some balancing, and if it sees some different performance metrics that I've set not being met, it'll actually move some of my virtual machines from, let's say, one host to another. It is sort of an automation tool that helps me. Basically, I specify the metric, and if I get a certain host or something being over-utilized, it'll automatically move the virtual machines around for me. It basically has to snap into my vCenter and then it can make adjustments and move my virtual machines around. It also has some very nice reporting tools built around virtual machines. It tells you how much storage, memory, or CPU is being used monthly, and then it gives you a very nice way to be able to send out billing structure to your end users who use servers within your environment.""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.""Before implementing Turbonomic, we had difficulty reaching a consensus about VM placement and sizing. Everybody's opinion was wrong, including mine. The application developers, implementers, and infrastructure team could never decide the appropriate size of a virtual machine. I always made the machines small, and they always made them too big. We were both probably wrong.""We have seen a 30% performance improvement overall.""We've saved hundreds of hours. Most of the time those hours would have to be after hours as well, which are more valuable to me as that's my personal time.""It has automated a lot of things. We have saved 30 to 35 percent in human resource time and cost, which is pretty substantial. We don't have a big workforce here, so we have to use all the automation we can get.""On-premises, one advantage I find particularly appealing is the ability to create policies for automatic CPU and memory scaling based on demand."

More IBM Turbonomic Pros →

Cons
"They can add some of those features to make the platform more usable for different backgrounds and developer skills.""They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features.""The improvement I would like to see is not one thing particular to CloudCenter. I'd say it's more of a message that the system is still using a lot of the different products and if they would all just fit better together, they all could be faster together.""I'm not a big fan of CloudCenter. I don't have anything against it, however, the on-premise version has been so hard to upgrade and maintain.""The solution needs to be more simple.""Improvements are needed in UI and multi-tenancy for this solution.""The tool should improve its security on the XDR part.""You don't get all the solution's benefits if you have older switches."

More Cisco CloudCenter Cons →

"Some features are only available via changes to the deployment YAML, and it would be better to have them in the UI.""Turbonomic can modernize the look and feel, making it more user-friendly to access and obtain information.""The old interface was not the clearest UI in some areas, and could be quite intimidating when first using the tool.""Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing.""It sometimes does get false positives. Sometimes, it'll move something when it really wasn't a performance metric. I've seen it do that, but it's pretty much an automated tool for performance. We've only got about 500 virtual machines, so lots of times, I'm able to manage it physically, but it's definitely a nice tool for a larger enterprise that might be managing 2,000 or 3,000 virtual machines.""Additional interfaces would be helpful.""The reporting needs to be improved. It's important for us to know and be able to look back on what happened and why certain decisions were made, and we want to use a custom report for this.""If they would educate their customers to understand the latest updates, that would help customers... Also, there are a lot of features that are not available in Turbonomic. For example, PaaS component optimization and automation are still in the development phase."

More IBM Turbonomic Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The solution is extremely expensive and has additional fees for things like monitoring."
  • "The tool's pricing is balanced with the market."
  • "The tool's pricing is expensive."
  • More Cisco CloudCenter Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "We felt the pricing was very fair for the product. It is in no way prohibitive for larger deployments, unlike other similar product on the market."
  • "Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."
  • "What I can advise is to trial the product, taking advantage of the Turbonomic pre-sales implemention support and kickstart training."
  • "Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."
  • "You should understand the cost of your physical servers and how much time and money you are spending year over year on expanding your virtual farm."
  • "Price is a big one. VMTurbo was very competitively priced."
  • "If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."
  • "It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."
  • More IBM Turbonomic Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Migration solutions are best for your needs.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The initial setup process is straightforward.
    Top Answer:They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features.
    Top Answer:We use the product for demonstration, device provisioning, and data management.
    Top Answer:I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company before IBM's purchase, it was compatible with other tools.
    Top Answer:I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can add Azure NetApp Files. They can add Azure Blob storage. They have already added… more »
    Top Answer:I mostly provide it to my clients. There are multiple reasons why they would use it depending on the client's needs and their solution.
    Ranking
    10th
    out of 40 in Cloud Migration
    Views
    167
    Comparisons
    99
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    698
    Rating
    7.8
    5th
    out of 40 in Cloud Migration
    Views
    945
    Comparisons
    432
    Reviews
    14
    Average Words per Review
    1,360
    Rating
    8.4
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    CliQr, CliQr CloudCenter
    Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
    Learn More
    IBM
    Video Not Available
    Interactive Demo
    Cisco
    Demo Not Available
    Overview

    The Cisco CloudCenter solution is an application-centric hybrid cloud management platform that securely provisions infrastructure resources and deploys applications to data center, private cloud, and public cloud environments.

    With Cisco CloudCenter breakthrough application-centric technology, users
    can:

    • Model: Quickly and easily build a cloud-independent application profile that defines the deployment and management requirements of an entire application stack.
    • Deploy: Use one click to deploy the application profile and related components and data to any data center or cloud environment.
    • Manage: Apply a wide range of application lifecycle actions to set policies to enable in-place scaling, support cross-environment bursting or high availability and disaster recovery, and stop the deployment.

    IBM Turbonomic is a performance and cost optimization platform for public, private, and hybrid clouds used by customers to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications through automated actions. Common use cases include cloud cost optimization, cloud migration planning, data center modernization, FinOps acceleration, Kubernetes optimization, sustainable IT, and application resource management. Turbonomic customers report an average 33% reduction in cloud and infrastructure waste without impacting application performance, and return-on-investment of 471% over three years. Ready to take a closer look? Explore the interactive demo or start your free 30-day trial today!

    Sample Customers
    NTT, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), CollabNet, Pratt & Miller, PZFlex
    IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company36%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    Comms Service Provider10%
    Healthcare Company9%
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Insurance Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business44%
    Large Enterprise56%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise71%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise23%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Buyer's Guide
    Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Cisco CloudCenter is ranked 10th in Cloud Migration with 9 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 5th in Cloud Migration with 204 reviews. Cisco CloudCenter is rated 7.8, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco CloudCenter writes "Useful features for configuring down to ports but extremely expensive". 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 ". Cisco CloudCenter is most compared with Cisco Intersight, CloudStack, VMware Aria Automation and Cisco UCS Director, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, Cisco Intersight, VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth and VMware vSphere. See our Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic report.

    See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors and best Cloud Management vendors.

    We monitor all Cloud Migration 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.