We performed a comparison between Datadog and DX Spectrum based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The most valuable features are the dashboards and the reporting."
"The integration into AWS is key as well as our software is currently bound to AWS."
"We integrate our application logs. It is great to be able to tie our metrics and our traces together."
"Since we integrated Datadog, we have had increased confidence in the quality of our service, and we had an easier time increasing our delivery velocity."
"We have a better grasp of what is occurring during the deployment cycle. If something fails, we have an idea what has failed, where it has failed, and how it failed to better mitigate the situation."
"The most valuable aspect is the APM which can monitor the metrics and latencies."
"It has scaled great. I haven't run into any problems anywhere that I've used it. They have handled everything that we have needed them to."
"Its logs are most valuable."
"It is easy to navigate."
"The most valuable feature is automatic discovery."
"It is easy to understand and determine when and/or where the network is failing."
"I can use it to detect whenever things go wrong on my network."
"We can monitor MPLS network VPN, network configuration, and backups. It's highly scalable for network configuration management."
"The main thing is obviously notifications about alerts, getting ahead of the curve to make sure that we do not have system going down, or if it is down we get to know it earlier."
"The product’s stability and robustness are valuable."
"Spectrum does such a great job of discovering our network that we have a high confidence in what our inventory is."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"We would like to see some versioning system for the Synthetic Tests so that we could have a backup of our tests since they are time-consuming to make and very easy to damage in a moment of error."
"The error traceability is an area that can be improved."
"We would like to see smaller or shorter tutorials and video sessions."
"At the beginning, when we started throwing logs at it, there was a bit of hiccup. However, this was during their beta period, so hiccups were expected."
"The documentation could be improved regarding setting up the agent properly and debugging."
"It can be overwhelming for new people as it has a lot of features."
"There is occasional UI slowness and bugs."
"I would like better navigability across pages."
"I would suggest improving the web GUI to improve the device monitor configuration and to improve or to integrate the new tool for reporting."
"From a functionality perspective, the product is not doing what it should. Also, there are some concerns about the accessibility. I would appreciate additional out-of-the-box troubleshooting scripts, like templates for addressing various issues. Currently, when troubleshooting online, I need to create my scripts. It would be beneficial if the platform could provide pre-built scripts or templates to help automate certain troubleshooting tasks."
"I think the management or configuration of devices needs some improvement."
"The upgrade process could be smoother. More of the steps around upgrading could be automated."
"We have had some issues with the spec server and the high availability replication of data. It fails over well, but it does not come back very well. We get duplicated events."
"OS monitoring needs to be better developed, as well as their services, e.g., cluster monitoring, URLs, etc."
"It needs better integration with other CA products."
"For my use case, incident coordination was an area of improvement. The internal software engine for coordinating outages could use improvement because sometimes, we used to get false alerts for unrelated devices. They did a really good job of trying to make sure that you got one major alert and any of the subsequent devices downstream were just additions to that, but occasionally, the engine wouldn't properly catch the right things, and we used to get a flood of alerts."
Datadog is ranked 2nd in Network Monitoring Software with 137 reviews while DX Spectrum is ranked 13th in Network Monitoring Software with 115 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while DX Spectrum is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of DX Spectrum writes "Comprehensive alerts, beneficial overall network viability, and scalability not limited". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and AppDynamics, whereas DX Spectrum is most compared with DX NetOps, Zabbix, SolarWinds NPM, Cisco DNA Center and ThousandEyes. See our DX Spectrum vs. Datadog report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.