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 very scalable."
"It is easy to implement but requires good planning."
"It reduced cycles for a lot of quick out-of-the-box functionality. It also allowed us to get away from being stuck in SNMP, VTP V2, based off of agent deployment."
"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."
"We are able to go in and actually leverage the thick client for a nice easy drag and drop solution."
"It is easy to implement."
"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."
"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."
"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 SMP and the xStats, which is for flat file integration, are both useful for integrating the various metrics that the device provides to monitor the performance of those systems."
"The automation feature is good because if your CMDB is OK and it is already in sync, then the automation part is good to go."
"Its ability to monitor practically any type of network device via SNMP is most valuable. This is the main functionality that we're using. If a network device exposes a metric, such as interface utilization, SevOne will monitor it for us."
"Flexible architecture: You can extend the system and its capacity by attaching another cluster pair."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"We've had issues with pulling reports."
"We want to see more investment in the UI and the dashboard."
"There should be wider coverage of storage infrastructure."
"In the UMP, certain devices will show up multiple times and they don't correlate correctly. That's one of the issues."
"A useful feature to have would be automatic configuration per standard by new robots that check in for any particular customer."
"I think it can be improved by a greater provision of specialized technical support, as there are very few trained personnel there."
"The only challenge that I have with this solution is the reporting part. The users are not really comfortable with the kind of reports they are getting. Sometimes, they want to see reports in their own format. Customizing those reports with Jasper is not very easy. It could be because of the knowledge gap. If you have the knowledge of how Jasper can be configured to suit customer requirements in terms of reporting, it is good. There was a time a customer complained about one issue related to Netflow analysis. Broadcom has a separate model for that, but the customer wanted everything bundled together. It could also have IP management so that I am able to see or analyze IPs so that the IPs that are already in use don't get assigned."
"It is a little complex to use versus other softwares."
"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."
"Telemetry is hot these days, and IBM can improve SevOne's support for telemetry correction. Reporting is another feature that could be better. It provides the bare minimum functionality, which is good enough for most engineers, but the management isn't advanced. The new portal provides a much lighter view and better visualization, but the management is not so good."
"Would benefit with the addition of AI modules for proactive data insights."
"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."
"We previously have had discussions on some reporting enhancements. So, we raised a feature request, which was delivered from SevOne."
"User-friendly, multi-tenancy."
"Some similar solutions offer end-to-end visibility."
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.