We performed a comparison between Azure Cost Management and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Cost Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable aspect of the solution is the fact that it's extremely customizable. It makes it very flexible in terms of usage."
"The advisor recommendations feature is the most valuable feature. It helps set your environment in a clean state."
"The most valuable features of Azure Cost Management are the ability to set standards or tagging policies and initiatives. You can achieve higher cost optimization."
"The features that I have found most valuable, are the trend analysis and the budgetary trigger."
"I like the fact that you can set alerts on the predicted cost in Azure Cost Management."
"We use the solution as a cost management tool to control the budget. It is easy to mange costs with the product."
"We don't actually use the Azure Cost Management features. We have our own capabilities. We put our own technology on top of Azure as Azure doesn't deliver a really good cost optimization, so our customers come to us to enhance what they're potentially doing inside their Azure platform."
"Good control features and user interface."
"The primary features we have focused on are reporting and optimization."
"We like that Turbonomic shows application metrics and estimates the impact of taking a suggested action. It provides us a map of resource utilization as part of its recommendation. We evaluate and compare that to what we think would be appropriate from a human perspective to that what Turbonomic is doing, then take the best action going forward."
"With over 2500 ESX VMs, including 1500+ XenDesktop VDI desktops, hosted over two datacentres and 80+ vSphere hosts, firefighting has become something of the past."
"Turbonomic has helped optimize cloud operations and reduced our cloud costs significantly. Overall, we are at about 40 percent savings, and we spend about three million a year just in Azure. It reduces the size of the VMs, putting them into the right template for usage. People don't realize that you don't have to future-proof a virtual machine in Azure. You just need to build it for today. As the business or service grows, you can scale up or out. About 90 percent of all the costs that we've reduced has been from sizing machines appropriately."
"I only deal with the infrastructure side, so I really couldn't speak to more than load balancing as the most valuable feature for me. It provides specific actions that prevent resource starvation. It always keeps things in perfect balance."
"I like the analytics that help us optimize compatibility. Whereas Azure Advisor tells us what we have to do, Turbonomic has automation which actually does those things. That means we don't have to be present to get them done and simplifies our IT engineers' jobs."
"Rightsizing is valuable. Its recommendations are pretty good."
"The automation and orchestration components are definitely the best part, as you can tell it what it can do and when, and just let it be."
"I haven't detected anything that needs improvement, but any solution could be improved."
"The solution could use automatic emailing. That would help improve the product a lot, at least for our purposes."
"The product's foecasting needs improvement."
"The response time of customer support can be improved."
"The solution needs an automated dashboard and better reporting."
"It would be nice if they could introduce connections to other clouds. It would be good to connect to AWS and Oracle cloud."
"The dashboard could be improved."
"The UI is complex, and it should be less so."
"We don't use Turbonomic for FinOps and part of the reason is its cost reporting. The reporting could be much more robust and, if that were the case, I could pitch it for FinOps."
"I would love to see Turbonomic analyze backup data. We have had people in the past put servers into daily full backups with seven-year retention and where the disk size is two terabytes. So, every single day, there is a two terabyte snapshot put into a Blob somewhere. I would love to see Turbonomic say, "Here are all your backups along with the age of them," to help us manage the savings by not having us spend so much on the storage in Azure. That would be huge."
"It would be nice for them to have a way to do something with physical machines, but I know that is not their strength Thankfully, the majority of our environment is virtual, but it would be nice to see this type of technology across some other platforms. It would be nice to have capacity planning across physical machines."
"The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines."
"Enhanced executive reporting standard with the tool beyond the reports that can be created today. Something that can easily be used with upper management on a monthly or quarterly basis to show the impact to our environment."
"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."
"While the product is fairly intuitive and easy to use once you learn it, it can be quite daunting until you have undergone a bit of training."
"Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing."
Azure Cost Management is ranked 2nd in Cloud Cost Management with 41 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 1st in Cloud Cost Management with 204 reviews. Azure Cost Management is rated 8.0, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure Cost Management writes "A good, but limited cost information solution with strong analytics but requiring more flexibility in its reporting functionality". 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 ". Azure Cost Management is most compared with VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth, AWS Savings Plans, Cloudability, Zabbix and Datadog, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth, VMware vSphere and Cloudability. See our Azure Cost Management vs. IBM Turbonomic report.
See our list of best Cloud Cost Management vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Cost Management 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.
