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.
"AppDynamics has been stable."
"The most valuable feature in AppDynamics is the identifying of the slow responses. Additionally, it is easy to use."
"Before we moved the code to AppDynamics, we had to compare the agile process and also had to make sure that they're following the standards."
"It helped to find quick solutions for specific business transactions."
"It's good for a larger scale deployment such as what my company is working on."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the fact that it is very easy to use, making it easy to implement...It is a very stable solution."
"I think the performance and interface are the most important features."
"This is a stable product and we definitely plan to continue using it in the future."
"Scalable, stable, and easy to deploy APM tool which effectively monitors code-level visibility."
"JVM memory monitoring and connection pool monitoring are valuable features."
"Attribute decoration is a unique and very powerful feature. We can add meaningful meta information based on our internal demand."
"This application pulls data in 15 seconds. You can imagine the enormous amount of data which streams through."
"Standard available reports provide us with an automatic insight into the top ten situations to watch. It would have been extremely difficult to program such a report ourselves, and to my knowledge no other competitor can match this functionality."
"We use it to create dashboards and executive view dashboards, so our higher up managers can take a look and see where our application status stands."
"It covers from mainframe, all the way to dotcom, for example. CA currently covers Amazon, Microsoft Azure, Office 365 monitoring."
"The deployment was easy."
"The training on the dashboards that is provided could be a little bit better, as could the use cases. They should have some good examples out there. As it is right now, I had to scour YouTube to find some stuff."
"AppDynamics is agent-based, so some customers are reluctant to install the agents in all their production environments. It would be helpful if they had an agentless version. It covers applications on the server, but the solution is weak on the network side. The agent is not deployed on the network components, so it cannot provide complete information about issues on the network layer."
"It could do with more than one data centre/multiple AWS accounts in a pane of glass. Also, improved scalability to large environments would be helpful."
"The agent deployment could be simplified by, for example, adding a GUI."
"We have had downtime, which has been the result of config, application, or cord issues."
"AppDynamics scaled well up to around 3,000 agents. The performance deteriorated after that, while Dynatrace could support more than 10,000 agents. We were surprised that AppDynamics' scalability is not so good."
"The initial setup could be easier."
"I would like to see more artificial intelligence and machine learning brought in to monitor the statement and payment sum issues we have."
"The area of improvement is related to the areas of application onboarding and instrumentation, where the product has certain shortcomings."
"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."
"Lacks some integration between all the tools."
"The technical support is very poor."
"What comes to mind when you speak of a room for improvement in Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is the infrastructure agent, but my company doesn't use it, so I can't say if it's really a problem or not, but it could be the container support or cloud support that could be improved in the solution. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is for it to have one agent for cloud and one agent for legacy, with all features included."
"The interface is getting a little old."
"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."
"As applications move to the cloud, we need more cloud-based solutions from CA APM. This is currently unavailable."
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.