Cisco CloudCenter vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco Logo
176 views|105 comparisons
87% willing to recommend
IBM Logo
958 views|433 comparisons
98% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cisco CloudCenter and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Migration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic Report (Updated: May 2024).
769,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The solution is agile and it has APIs for integration.""Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very well.""I can define all components and create a blueprint for consumption across all services.""The initial setup process is straightforward.""Upgrades are very simple as well because they've allowed us to get updates directly in the CloudCenter Suite manager. If you need to do an upgrade to your setup afterward, you just push a button and it rolls out the parts and retires the old ones. It's seamless and very simple compared to what we've done before.""The initial setup is fairly straightforward if you have a basic setup.""Cisco CloudCenter's scalability is good.""You can scale it easily."

More Cisco CloudCenter Pros →

"The notifications saying, "This is a corrective action," even though some of them can be automated, are always welcome to see. They summarize your entire infrastructure and how you can better utilize it. That is the biggest feature.""Turbonomic helps us right-size virtual machines to utilize the available infrastructure components available and suggest where resources should exist. We also use the predictive tool to forecast what will happen when we add additional compute-demanding virtual machines or something to the environment. It shows us how that would impact existing resources. All of that frees up time that would otherwise be spent on manual calculation.""The recommendation of the family types is a huge help because it has saved us a lot of money. We use it primarily for that. Another thing that Turbonomic provides us with is a single platform that manages the full application stack and that's something I really like.""It is a good holistic platform that is easy to use. It works pretty well.""The system automatically sizes and moves resources based on the needs of the applications.""The feature for optimizing VMs is the most valuable because a number of the agencies have workloads or VMs that are not really being used. Turbonomic enables us to say, 'If you combine these, or if you decide to go with a reserve instance, you will save this much.'""I like Turbonomic's automation and AI machine learning features. It shows you what it can do, but it can also act on recommendations automatically. Integration with an APM system makes the AI/ML features truly effective. Understanding what the application is doing and the trends of application behavior can help you make real-world decisions and act on that information.""I like Turbonomic's built-in reporting. It provides a ton of information out of the box, so I don't have to build panels for the monthly summaries and other reports I need to present to management. We get better performance and bottleneck reporting from this than we do from our older EMC software."

More IBM Turbonomic Pros →

Cons
"I'm not a big fan of CloudCenter. I don't have anything against it, however, the on-premise version has been so hard to upgrade and maintain.""You don't get all the solution's benefits if you have older switches.""The solution needs to be more simple.""They can add some of those features to make the platform more usable for different backgrounds and developer skills.""Improvements are needed in UI and multi-tenancy for this solution.""The tool should improve its security on the XDR part.""The improvement I would like to see is not one thing particular to CloudCenter. I'd say it's more of a message that the system is still using a lot of the different products and if they would all just fit better together, they all could be faster together.""They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features."

More Cisco CloudCenter Cons →

"I like the detail I get in the old user interface and will miss some of that in the new interface when we perform our planned upgrade soon.""After running this solution in production for a year, we may want a more granular approach to how we utilize the product because we are planning to use some of its metrics to feed into our financial system.""The one point is the reporting. We do have reports out of it, but they're not the level of graphical detail I would like.""In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings.""Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing.""It can be more agnostic in terms of the solutions that it provides. It can include some other cost-saving methods for the public cloud and SaaS applications as well.""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.""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."

More IBM Turbonomic Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The solution is extremely expensive and has additional fees for things like monitoring."
  • "The tool's pricing is balanced with the market."
  • "The tool's pricing is expensive."
  • More Cisco CloudCenter Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "We felt the pricing was very fair for the product. It is in no way prohibitive for larger deployments, unlike other similar product on the market."
  • "Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."
  • "What I can advise is to trial the product, taking advantage of the Turbonomic pre-sales implemention support and kickstart training."
  • "Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."
  • "You should understand the cost of your physical servers and how much time and money you are spending year over year on expanding your virtual farm."
  • "Price is a big one. VMTurbo was very competitively priced."
  • "If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."
  • "It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."
  • More IBM Turbonomic Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Migration solutions are best for your needs.
    769,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The initial setup process is straightforward.
    Top Answer:They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features.
    Top Answer:We use the product for demonstration, device provisioning, and data management.
    Top Answer:I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company before IBM's purchase, it was compatible with other tools.
    Top Answer:I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can add Azure NetApp Files. They can add Azure Blob storage. They have already added… more »
    Top Answer:I mostly provide it to my clients. There are multiple reasons why they would use it depending on the client's needs and their solution.
    Ranking
    10th
    out of 38 in Cloud Migration
    Views
    176
    Comparisons
    105
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    698
    Rating
    7.8
    5th
    out of 38 in Cloud Migration
    Views
    958
    Comparisons
    433
    Reviews
    14
    Average Words per Review
    1,360
    Rating
    8.4
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    CliQr, CliQr CloudCenter
    Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
    Learn More
    IBM
    Video Not Available
    Interactive Demo
    Cisco
    Demo Not Available
    Overview

    The Cisco CloudCenter solution is an application-centric hybrid cloud management platform that securely provisions infrastructure resources and deploys applications to data center, private cloud, and public cloud environments.

    With Cisco CloudCenter breakthrough application-centric technology, users
    can:

    • Model: Quickly and easily build a cloud-independent application profile that defines the deployment and management requirements of an entire application stack.
    • Deploy: Use one click to deploy the application profile and related components and data to any data center or cloud environment.
    • Manage: Apply a wide range of application lifecycle actions to set policies to enable in-place scaling, support cross-environment bursting or high availability and disaster recovery, and stop the deployment.

    IBM Turbonomic is a performance and cost optimization platform for public, private, and hybrid clouds used by customers to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications through automated actions. Common use cases include cloud cost optimization, cloud migration planning, data center modernization, FinOps acceleration, Kubernetes optimization, sustainable IT, and application resource management. Turbonomic customers report an average 33% reduction in cloud and infrastructure waste without impacting application performance, and return-on-investment of 471% over three years. Ready to take a closer look? Explore the interactive demo or start your free 30-day trial today!

    Sample Customers
    NTT, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), CollabNet, Pratt & Miller, PZFlex
    IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company35%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    Comms Service Provider10%
    Healthcare Company8%
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Insurance Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business44%
    Large Enterprise56%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise70%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise23%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Buyer's Guide
    Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    769,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Cisco CloudCenter is ranked 10th in Cloud Migration with 9 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 5th in Cloud Migration with 204 reviews. Cisco CloudCenter is rated 7.8, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco CloudCenter writes "Useful features for configuring down to ports but extremely expensive". 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 ". Cisco CloudCenter is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Cisco UCS Director, VMware Aria Automation, CloudStack and Faddom, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth and VMware vSphere. See our Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic report.

    See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors and best Cloud Management vendors.

    We monitor all Cloud Migration 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.