We performed a comparison between AppDynamics and Broadcom DX Application Performance Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: AppDynamics is favored over Broadcom DX Application Performance Management due to its comprehensive features, scalability, stability, and ease of use. It offers alerting, release management, dashboard building, visibility, slow response identification, and business insights. It can monitor various applications and manage log files. Although Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is easy to deploy and provides code-level visibility, it lacks tool integration, has performance issues, and lacks support and end-to-end correlation. AppDynamics also has better customer service and support and a more flexible pricing model.
"I think the performance and interface are the most important features."
"The initial setup is simple."
"The solution helps us provide a better user experience to our customers."
"The best feature of AppDynamics is the analytics, which gives us the business insights of the application."
"This is a stable product and we definitely plan to continue using it in the future."
"It's made it easier to collaborate across teams; be able to have the same data immediately in front of you just by sharing a URL."
"We set up alerts recently so we can fix any issues more quickly in production."
"The most valuable feature in AppDynamics is the identifying of the slow responses. Additionally, it is easy to use."
"JVM memory monitoring and connection pool monitoring are valuable features."
"We are using the on-premise and cloud versions of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management."
"Cross-platform business transaction tracing supports the ability to monitor end-to-end performance across the stack, providing granular insight into customer experience KPIs, which are a critical success factor for organizations."
"With the new feature CA Team Center is much easier to view the information of my user experience, with this unified vision, it was even practical for lay users to use the tool"
"Gives us the ability to know how our application is performing in real-time."
"Helps the development team to fine-tune and proactively manage the application."
"The time it takes to track problems in applications is the most valuable return that we have from this solution."
"Stability is one of the strongest attributes of CA APM. It is very stable on all platforms."
"If AppDynamics could do a one-agent function with their actual monitoring effectiveness, it will be the greatest tool."
"The network diagnostics that they are adding will be really useful. They could add more detail into what is going on in the network."
"Regarding Search Guard functionality, there is room for improvement."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"The end-user experience is not really good because we can't catch all of the transactions. We only can catch the full stack of flow transactions, but I think that this is caused by the technology they use. If they will catch every transaction, it will cause a very big load on the performance of applications. The monitoring of all transactions needs improvement."
"There could be some improvement in the constructions of the diagrams, it is too difficult currently."
"It would help to maybe have a more graphical interface and more user-friendly graphics."
"While it is scalable, it could be better."
"Needs custom dashboards."
"We need more capabilities to analyze the information that tools collects; for example, using artificial intelligence, or something like that."
"User interface - CA is moving towards HTML5, but still a lot is Java, old fashioned, non-customizable and not user friendly. It’s look and feel is still too technical."
"In order for the tool to be successful, at least in our organization, it will need to have more self-serve features for implementation, instrumentation, and then modification of metric data from the APM."
"The solution still needs the administrator of APM to know a lot more to configure and control everything. So it's a headache for the administrator to do the daily jobs."
"I would like them provide more guidance on specific tuning of monitoring options to avoid unacceptable overhead."
"Support could be much better."
"It should be easier to install or set everything up. "
More Broadcom DX Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics is ranked 2nd in Container Monitoring with 153 reviews while Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is ranked 4th in Container Monitoring with 161 reviews. AppDynamics is rated 8.2, while Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AppDynamics writes "Very good real-time monitoring capabilities, deep problem diagnosis, and transaction mapping". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management writes "Provides efficiency in migration and DAW but requires a high level of administrator knowledge for configuration". AppDynamics is most compared with Dynatrace, Elastic Observability, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and New Relic, whereas Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is most compared with Dynatrace, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, BMC TrueSight Operations Management, New Relic and OpenText Diagnostics. See our AppDynamics vs. Broadcom DX Application Performance Management report.
See our list of best Container Monitoring vendors and best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Container Monitoring 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.
AppDynamics, New Relic & CA Technologies?
It all depends on the problems you want to solve. They all have their strengths. CA is long in the tooth (old) and with NetQoS has new life being pushed into it, but making it all fit is a challenge. Also with CA you may have to open up the applications to add some other custom monitoring of application package names/methods if you want more detail than out of the box.
Understanding the full flow of a transaction when it talks to other transactions was our key to understanding why we had issues. The Riverbed family of products enabled that for us but even that required work on our part to further decode the MQ traffic better than they did. It went into the MQ Black box, and came out, but did not reveal what happened inside the box. There were requests inside the box that went elsewhere. Those had not been picked up with the tool.
Cons for all of them are that they only sample transactions and can't follow a single user from their device all the way through to the backend database or mainframe. Best using dynaTrace if you want true 100% end to end monitoring.
Saluting Mike, Richard for your sound advice!
Henry
I have found Dynatrace to be much better. It integrates with more tools than any of the 3 listed above.
From my experience with CA Wily, it's more expensive and requires a long implementation, it is also less flexible.
We did not consider New Relic because we did not want to have our sensitive data hosted in the cloud. Not acceptable in our business.
AppDynamics offered a short implementation time, immediate satisfaction and only required fine-tuning afterwards. Also the pricing was lower then CA Wily.
All three are good tools for monitoring web application transactions. Of course, CA has a much broader set of capabilities than the other two - can monitor networks, servers, databases, etc. AppDynamics provides a product that you can use in-house. NewRelic is only a SaaS offering. Which of these is best for you - depends on what you need. If you already have CA deployed, you are probably looking at just web transaction monitoring then. AppDynamics and NewRelic are more current in this area than CA Wily.