We performed a comparison between Datadog and Opsview 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 aspect is for us to have everything in one place."
"Using the data, our operation teams works with the dashboards to get their statistics, analytics, etc."
"The network map is crucial in identifying bottlenecks and determining what needs more attention."
"The solution allows flexibility and heightened observability for presenting data, creating indicators, and setting service-level objectives."
"Datadog helps us detect issues early on and helps in troubleshooting."
"APM is great and has provided low-effort out-of-the-box observability for various services."
"It has enhanced the performance of my team."
"I really enjoy the RUM monitoring features of Datadog. It allows us to monitor user behavior in a way we couldn't before."
"What was very compelling about OpsView was that we could dial out the noise and have meaningful and actionable alerts."
"I am satisfied with the overall product since it works well…It is a stable solution."
"We use this solution for internal monitoring our own cloud platform because we are a public cloud provider. We also use it for monitoring purposes on behalf of our clients."
"The most valuable feature of Opsview is the ability to clone the services when you're monitoring something out of the test setup."
"It's a good solution. It covers all aspects of monitoring purposes."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"We need more integration with security tools like Drata."
"Even though it is powerful on its own, the UI-based design lacks elegance, efficiency, and complexity."
"We need more advanced querying against logs."
"The solution should provide alerts for cloud outages."
"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."
"Delta traces on the Golang profiler are extremely expensive concerning memory utilization."
"We need more visibility into the error tracking dashboard."
"When it comes to storing the logs with Datadog, I'm not sure why it costs so much to store gigabytes or terabytes of information when it's a fraction of the cost to do so myself."
"Pricing and a few certain aspects in the solution needs to be improved."
"Some of the graphics on Opsview could be improved."
"In a future release, we would like to have Observ for AI. Any AI and intelligence it can add to the monitoring is obviously beneficial. We would also like to have automated callouts."
"Customized reporting can be improved."
"Maybe the graphical representation can be improved. It can be enhanced for better visualization. It could be a little better. And the graph center can be improved."
Datadog is ranked 2nd in Network Monitoring Software with 137 reviews while Opsview is ranked 32nd in Network Monitoring Software with 24 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while Opsview is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Opsview writes "Responsive and easy to customize alerts for, while being priced similarly to its competition". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and AppDynamics, whereas Opsview is most compared with OP5 Monitor, Zabbix, Nagios XI, Instana Infrastructure Monitoring and SCOM. See our Datadog vs. Opsview report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Cloud 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.