We compared Datadog and PRTG Network Monitor across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Datadog users like its customizable displays, error tracking, and advanced AI/ML capabilities. PRTG Network Monitor customers like its user-centric approach, straightforward reporting, and customizability.
Room for Improvement: Datadog could enhance its usability and reduce its learning curve. Users said integration was another pain point. PRTG Network Monitor could improve its performance and resource efficiency. Other pain points include usability and cross-platform compatibility.
Service and Support: While many users spoke highly of Datadog’s support team, others reported slow support responses, especially in the Asia-Pacific region. PRTG Network Monitor received mixed reviews for its customer service. Some users commended the support team’s prompt service, while others reported slow response times and noted the lack of remote session support.
Ease of Deployment: Datadog’s setup is considered straightforward, and users often receive help from a partner or vendor. PRTG Network Monitor’s setup isn’t considered to be overly complex. Deployment times may vary depending on the environment's complexity and device count.
Pricing: Opinions about Datadog's price are divided. Some users found it costly, but others thought it was acceptable. Some said the pricing model could be clearer and better explained. PRTG Network Monitor is deemed reasonably priced and cheaper than its competitors.
ROI: Users said Datadog saved them time and improved visibility into security blind spots. Users said that PRTG Network Monitor has proven to save time and money through automation and proactive support.
Comparison Results: Datadog is praised for its customizability, easy setup, and robust AI features. However, some users say it has room for improvement in areas like usability and integration. Datadog’s pricing and customer service received mixed reviews. PRTG Network Monitor is regarded as a simple, user-friendly, and cost-effective solution, but users would like to see improvements in performance, documentation, integration, and technical support.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The tool's deployment is easy."
"The most valuable feature of Datadog is its logs."
"The feature I have found most valuable is when I can reuse existing monitors and alerts for new dashboards."
"The interface and the integrations make it so easy to connect to the cloud or to the on-premise environment."
"The observability on offer is the most useful aspect of the product."
"I have found some of the most valuable features to be the way things all come together that gives us a point of view that is useful. The panel is very beautiful and customizable."
"We can handle debugging and find out why things are breaking in our applications."
"The biggest thing I liked was the combination of all the things - monitoring, log aggregation, and profiling."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"It is easy when it comes to dependencies of devices, so if your router goes down, the three or four switches behind it will automatically be paused so that you don't get multiple alerts."
"The fact that I can use custom MIB files to customize my sensors for the things that are not there as a default is a good feature."
"We can see trends for a lot of different things, such as hard drive space and bandwidth usage. We can see and plan for the future by knowing, "We're sort of at 75% capacity now. In three months time, we know we're going to be up to 90%,so we need to plan ahead for it, getting upgrades booked in place." Since things like this take time and effort, it's handy to see trends into the future of where our company is going."
"We can see which fiber links have been used heavily and, if they are used heavily, we can introduce more links to particular buildings or particular areas."
"Its proactiveness is its most valuable feature. We already know when we come in, in the morning, if a server or site is down, as opposed to someone telling us."
"The most valuable feature is the dashboard interface. It's very clean, it's very simple to use."
"The scalability is good. You can improve a remote host or the clustering. This gives it the flexibility to monitor another infrastructure remotely."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Delta traces on the Golang profiler are extremely expensive concerning memory utilization."
"For three to four months, we have been experiencing real-time delays. For example, if we're monitoring incoming traffic, the real-time status should be displayed up to a certain point. However, due to delays or issues with Datadog, the real-time data might only be updated at an earlier time. We are experiencing consistent delays in data updates from Datadog, with the most recent data often being delayed by about an hour. This issue has been ongoing for the past four months."
"The pricing is a bit confusing."
"While I like the ease of use, when compared with Tenable Nessus they could still improve their usability."
"I sometimes log in and see items changed, either in the UI or a feature enabled. To see it for the first time without proper communication can sometimes come as a shock."
"We need more integration with security tools like Drata."
"I'm not sure what kind of features are in the roadmap right now, but I encourage the development of features for defining your organization, and allowing the visibility of what kind of metrics you can get. Those features would be really useful for us."
"We want to reduce having to go to different screens to obtain all the information."
"I've encountered a challenge in my functions, particularly in adding and printing."
"Along with more room for automation, more room for advanced configuration can be integrated into the solution."
"I would like to see a more robust platform and a new dashboard. In addition, the code is good, but it needs improvement."
"Integration into service management ticketing systems could be better. They should simplify the integration into big service management platforms like ServiceNow, Remedy, and Cherwell. They're really into monitoring, but they don't do any self-resolution. It would be better if the company moved more into the AIOps space so that you could actually kick off some remedies. I know that you can execute some commands from the tool, but you need to develop those all yourself. It would be really handy if they had some auto-remedy scripts that they could develop on top."
"The thing that we do struggle with a bit is in the historic data. If I want look over 30 days, because it averages out onto one graph, you can't zoom in and drill down information."
"In terms of sensors and probes, it would be really cool if PRTG had a purely Azure-based solution. We had to install a probe on one of our cloud servers and then let that probe out from there. It would be really cool if it just monitored Azure without having to install something on the device."
"There seems to be a big jump from the basic scan to the really thorough scan. There is a big jump in the quantity of sensors it uses for certain things. One minute you might get ten and then the next you get 200. There seems to be a big jump between the two at times."
"The database needs improvement."
Datadog is ranked 2nd in Network Monitoring Software with 137 reviews while PRTG Network Monitor is ranked 5th in Network Monitoring Software with 96 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while PRTG Network Monitor is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PRTG Network Monitor writes "It's an all-in-one solution, and net flow is included in the licensing ". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability, whereas PRTG Network Monitor is most compared with Zabbix, Centreon, Nagios XI, SolarWinds NPM and Datto Remote Monitoring and Management. See our Datadog vs. PRTG Network Monitor 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.
