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."
"Monitors the infrastructure asset and also monitors as an IT service."
"Having all of our information within one tool set; our alerts, our monitors, and the things that our operations team needs to function."
"We are able to go in and actually leverage the thick client for a nice easy drag and drop solution."
"What I like about DX Unified Infrastructure Management is that it's a very good product. The feature I found most valuable in the solution is the MCS feature, which is the automatic deployment of the objects you want to monitor. You can set up a system, for example, if it's a Windows machine and I want to test specific devices on it, I could do that through DX Unified Infrastructure Management. That type of deployment is very good because it means you won't miss any monitoring aspect on any server."
"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."
"The ability to monitor any platform. We have Windows, Linux, AIX, and mainframe all being monitored with the same UIM infrastructure."
"I definitely appreciate the flexibility and ease of use. We've been using UIM for almost three years now. It's pretty much point and click, very easy to use. And we've had no problems scaling it to our own environment."
"You can scale it pretty much however way you want to as long as you have the servers to throw at it."
"The most valuable feature is the NMS because that's the core of the system. Without the NMS, the other tools aren't that usable."
"SevOne’s data collection functionality is very good. From a collection point of view, we pull SNMP data, which is simple. It is easy to manipulate the pull in the estate. It is really simple compared to some of the other products that we have used. However, for deferred data, i.e., things that we import or don't pull directly, we tend to have a preplanned integration. So, its Universal Collector is really useful."
"We have benefited mainly from the use of the dashboard interface. It makes the network visually interesting for other people who are not in the network. A lot of people are not network techies who understand streams in the network. Based on location, we have streams coming in and out. They can see visually when there is some problem. They don't need to understand all the network technology behind it to be able to understand if everything is working well or if there is a problem."
"The monitoring of the network is very customizable. That is its unique feature."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is the scale-up and scale-down. The scale-up is an operation where the CPU boosts-up and then the memory will boost-up. That works awesomely."
"The out of the box reports and workflows are pretty good and they meet our requirements well."
"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."
"It's a great solution for highlighting and discovering useful information regarding our network's elements."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Currently lacks a mobile application which would be helpful."
"We had to do some work to make what was more of a business class solution work at an enterprise level."
"They need to continue to advance the filter capabilities, and provide more input fields."
"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."
"DX UIM's reporting and customization need to be improved."
"The other element is that there are no real templates, out of the box. Let's go with an example where we do have the probe, which is great, and we do have a really nuanced customer with a small set of devices that maybe not a lot of other customers use. There might not be a template in place, so effectively we have the tool in front of us but we still need to develop a solution. So it would be really nice to see a little bit more of something like a central repository of templates that we could use. That would help us expedite our onboarding process."
"In the UMP, certain devices will show up multiple times and they don't correlate correctly. That's one of the issues."
"We want to see more investment in the UI and the dashboard."
"The tool needs improvement in non-Cisco SD-WAN."
"There are some tweaks and enhancements that I've already requested. One is to be able to make changes per device rather than as a global setting. That has to do with naming. It's minor."
"When I started using it, I tried adding one of the BroadWorks application servers into SevOne... it created thousands and thousands of objects from that one application server and we immediately ran out of license... It would help, when new objects are discovered, if there were a way to categorize those objects and to pick the part of the object you need..."
"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."
"I would like to see live maps as an added feature. Also, build modules on AI and EML to provide better data insights that would proactively tell us what we should be looking after."
"The reports are easy to configure but they are a bit outdated in terms of appearance and visualization."
"The one area with room for improvement is probably administration. They added data insights to make a better user experience, but I'd like to see some improvements in the way the system's administered."
"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"
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 37th in Network Monitoring Software with 120 reviews while IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is ranked 41st 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 SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor, whereas IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is most compared with LogicMonitor, Instana Infrastructure Monitoring, SolarWinds NPM, Splunk Enterprise Security and SolarWinds Network Device Monitor. 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.