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.
"The release management capabilities are great."
"AppDynamics is scalable."
"The features that I like best are the dashboard and Business Journey."
"It allows us to configure health rules so that we can, based on our own experience, determine when an application is behaving incorrectly."
"It is a wonderful monitoring tool that manages various aspects such as system resources (CPU, RAM), mobile performance, and infrastructure monitoring."
"After we implemented this solution, we can easily determine the root cause of issues."
"It is easy to gain visibility into complex environments with AppDynamics. It has the ability to combine operation information of the environment and business information with strong business IQ support."
"It's good for a larger scale deployment such as what my company is working on."
"This application pulls data in 15 seconds. You can imagine the enormous amount of data which streams through."
"In terms of stability, it has been stable so far."
"The CA tools allow to me to get into detailed transactions for custom ranking, and be able to make predictions. It also gathers data. Some other tools may be good at one area, but not good overall, including the mainframe."
"The most valuable features are the low overhead, the ability to monitor production on 24/7 principle, the ability to decrease time to discover the point of failure in the IT infrastructure or the application environment in a short period of time, reporting for analyzing the performance of the application for improving the code optimizing process."
"The deployment was easy."
"I found the solution's end-to-end analysis and flexibility most valuable."
"It's a very stable product."
"Proactive snapshots of transactions and all details of a transaction are saved in case of an error."
"The initial setup could be easier."
"At this time, we don't have much visibility on the virtual environment, monitoring, and all other things. We have visibility only for database monitoring, and we have noticed performance impact when deploying database agents on the database server. We got to know this from AppDynamics support also that we should not deploy database agents from the database server. When agents are deployed on the same server and the database is monitored from there, we are not getting database server metrics. Therefore, we don't have those insights, and sometimes, we struggle because of that. They can improve this functionality so that we do not have a performance impact, and we can deploy anywhere. This would help us a lot. In terms of end-user monitoring, currently, it is not working for us because there are some complexities. It is a little complicated, and it takes a little bit of time to understand where you need to make changes. It would be very helpful if they can provide some template designs for end-user monitoring. When our servers are running on VMs, we don't get many insights from the VM side. I don't know whether it is possible to have visibility beyond the database, server, and application and whether there are some features where we can deploy AppDynamics on VMs as well. Such functionality would give us more control over storage, VM, OS, and database. It will also provide complete visibility of our hardware and software."
"AppDynamics could benefit from greater integration with emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning."
"Its resiliency can be improved. We're told that the best we can do with an on-prem solution is to have a hot standby that requires a manual switchover. So, it is a do-it-yourself Ikea model of maintaining data consistency between two servers, without having low balance or failover considerations for an on-prem solution."
"The worst part is that the AppDynamics SaaS Environment has a lot of downtimes, and AppDynamics, despite our efforts, does not give us any feedback on these downtimes/incidents."
"This solution is expensive."
"The solution could improve by covering more technologies. For example, it does support .NET Core applications. However, it could be a bit better."
"It is stable, but the only downside is the licensing part."
"Broadcom DX Application Performance Management could improve its supportability to the current technologies and the end-to-end correlation feature should be done automatically without custom configurations. Additionally, there should not be any configuration changes to the client-side when deploying the solution."
"The APM SQL feature doesn't perform like we would like it to. I know that's a new feature with 10.5, so it may be one of those things that gets a little better, but it should run faster."
"Upgradability to it is a project instead of a patch. If it was actually an automated process to where it just fed updates to our product that would be great. Now, we have to spin up an effort to actually upgrade the solution."
"The following need improvement: 1) Integration of third-party content into app maps (e.g. data coming from beats/elastic platform). 2) Support of new application server technologies, time to adopt new versions of them. 3) Dashboarding capabilities (as with all other vendors). 4) Application architecture of the central Enterprise Manager should be developed into a cloud native architecture. 5) Mitigation of SPOF – PostgreSQL database, behind Team Center."
"Lacks some integration between all the tools."
"The stability could be more reliable."
"There are several areas that could be improved in Broadcom DX Application Performance Management. One of the main areas is user experience monitoring, which is currently not available. Additionally, they need to develop a solution that is compatible with OpenShift 4, as their current solution only works when an agent is installed within the image, which is not possible in OpenShift 4 as it removes the agent."
"One of the challenges is agent releases. So as we employ agents, they are done relatively manually. A little bit of automating of agent release would be helpful."
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, BMC TrueSight Operations Management, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, New Relic and Splunk Enterprise Security. 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.