We performed a comparison between DX Unified Infrastructure Management and IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) 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."
"It is easy to implement."
"It delivers our customers many metrics, so they may make decisions"
"The ability to monitor any platform. We have Windows, Linux, AIX, and mainframe all being monitored with the same UIM infrastructure."
"The feature that we've found to be very helpful is the way the solution categorizes the devices to identify groups, groups of devices and clusters. This allows us to be aware of their position within the topology."
"Technical support is great."
"Scalability and flexibility. The product can grow with your infrastructure so you don't have to install other products. Just add components. It's very simple."
"The number of probes available. Out of the box, I believe about 200 probes are available. And, if there's a probe that is not available, you can write one. You can also go to the communities and suggest, and based on demand, CA will write one for you."
"It is the foundation for our monitoring solution."
"The modules and the performance management reports that come with data insights are two of the most valuable features. I also find the reports for Wi-Fi, Netflow, LAN, and WAN for monitoring to be very good."
"The out of the box reports and workflows are pretty good and they meet our requirements well."
"The network data collection has been very flexible for us. It's been thorough in areas that were lacking. They have a team that I've worked with to add other pieces to it. So if it's missing something out of the box, they work with me to add it. I was able to collect that data. It's not perfect, but it's pretty thorough."
"Another useful feature is that SevOne gives you real-time insights into your network performance. It polls every five minutes. That is important for our customers because there are some network teams that are always monitoring their networks."
"In 90% of the cases, new devices are plug-and-play, so when a new version comes out then SevOne has support for it out of the box."
"Scalability. I have never had to worry about how to handle really big environments."
"With this tool it is interesting to show the info to the client and explain where the traffic is."
"We've had great feedback from our customers about SevOne support. They're willing to set up a remote session upon request. You have to go through three tiers of support with most vendors, and they ask a lot of screening questions before they will do a remote session. You need to spend a lot of time before an engineer will host a remote session to look at your problematic system."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"It is a little complex to use versus other softwares."
"In the UMP, certain devices will show up multiple times and they don't correlate correctly. That's one of the issues."
"They need to continue to advance the filter capabilities, and provide more input fields."
"Making a GUI with criteria such as selection by robot/hub/probe etc."
"There should be wider coverage of storage infrastructure."
"I'd also like to see more probes. More probes in the sense that we were coming across devices that we're expected to monitor and manage for which, out of the box, there isn't a nice, clean solution. There are probes that are dedicated for certain devices and certain device types, which is great. But then there are times we come across nuanced products that we have to develop our own solution for. There are probes that exist in there that allow us to make a customized solution, but it takes a lot more time."
"I would like to see auditability. We've built our own audit functionality to ensure that every CI has the desired model configuration applied to it. And we run that on a daily basis. If that became part of the product, I think it might be a little bit less intensive in terms of resource, because we're doing it with scripts."
"The dashboards need to be improved."
"You need to plan integrations. That has been the biggest bug with SevOne so far. For the things that SevOne pulls directly, those are easy to understand, modify, and put into the database. For things that need to use the Universal Collector or xStats, you need to plan that stuff well in advance."
"The customizations are very hard. The person doing it has to be very good at analytics and has to be very good in all languages"
"With the administrative management of the appliance, if some object appears from SevOne because something changed in the network or whatever, then as an administrator you will not be aware. If you are using this object in a report, this object will disappear from the report and you will not be aware of it. So, if you have 1,000 reports, you cannot always check these reports everyday to see if objects are missing or information has disappeared. We don't have any information on alerts, saying that something is happening there and maybe we need to take action. If an object was replaced by another one, or if a link was replaced by another one, then the graph needs to be changed because it doesn't exist in the graph anymore. However, we don't have this information."
"One area that requires a little bit of improvement is the topology of visualization and being able to map out connections, end-to-end. It's able to do that, but it's not as impressive as we would like it to be. We would like to understand the different interface types and the connection points better, through the visualization. Heatmaps also need further development."
"The reporting of NMS is good, but it could be better."
"The user management features need to be improved. It would be nice if we had more granular control, or layers of control, out of the box."
"In terms of having a complete view of our network performance, I would rate it a nine out of 10. The reason for not giving it a 10 is that there is no packet capture associated with SevOne, but we do have other tools in place to do that."
"There are a lot of pain points. My main problem is that we don't have a high availability system. There are 20 peers. We're going to lose the end-of-life appliances that are old. If we lose a peer and it doesn't come back, we lose all that data. The reason we don't have high availability is because it's double the charge."
More DX Unified Infrastructure Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
DX Unified Infrastructure Management is ranked 38th in Network Monitoring Software with 120 reviews while IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is ranked 21st in Network Monitoring Software with 52 reviews. DX Unified Infrastructure Management is rated 8.2, while IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of DX Unified Infrastructure Management writes "Easy to set up, simple to use, and offers great technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) writes "We can get a new vendor certified and monitored in our system significantly faster than before". DX Unified Infrastructure Management is most compared with DX SaaS, DX Spectrum, SCOM, ManageEngine OpManager and Nagios XI, whereas IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is most compared with LogicMonitor, Instana Infrastructure Monitoring, SolarWinds NPM, Splunk Enterprise Security and Zabbix. See our DX Unified Infrastructure Management vs. IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Server Monitoring 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.