We performed a comparison between Informatica PowerCenter and SAS Data Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Informatica, Oracle and others in Data Integration."Among all the solutions I have used, I found Informatica PowerCenter to be much more stable in terms of application."
"The most valuable feature of Informatica PowerCenter is data transformation and user-friendliness."
"Deployment was simple and straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Informatica PowerCenter is the flow designer functionally. It is the best out of any ETL tool. Additionally, the solution is reliable and trustable in dealing with large data sources anytime. When we're using billions of data transactions, it's smooth."
"The most valuable feature is the new Data Lake feature, which provides the basic capabilities needed."
"What I like the most is that we have to deal with less while writing the queries."
"I would recommend that others considering the solution go ahead and use it for any batch and high volume loads with complex transactions."
"The performance and design of Informatica have been very valuable. I find the performance faster than, say, Oracle Data Integrator or DataStage."
"In terms of which features I have found most valuable, I would say the importing and exporting features. Additionally, the data sorting, categorizing and summarizing features, especially how it can summarize based on categories. These are the key features."
"The technical support is excellent."
"If you compare it to SQL, the memory and development times are very quick."
"I am impressed with the tool's ability to customize."
"Its robustness is valuable. It is a full-fledged suite. We have a data warehouse model, and there are also a lot of data quality management tools. The repository and all other tools are there. So, it is a full package in terms of reporting tools."
"The product offers very good flexibility."
"The tool is reliable, quick, and powerful."
"The solution is very stable. We haven't faced any issues with glitches or bugs. We haven't had any crashes."
"Informatica PowerCenter is outdated and would benefit from modernization. They should have a very good migration strategy from Informatica PowerCenter to AACF. Informatica PowerCenter there is no point in using it, you have to use a cloud version."
"There can be scalability issues. Huge amounts of data ingestion will impact performance."
"As a connector to big data, it is not well developed. We've had problems connecting Informatica with Hadoop. The functionality to connect Informatica with Hadoop, for me it's not good."
"It would be good to recreate the entire interface to make it easier for users to build workflows."
"Areas for improvement in Informatica PowerCenter include scalability and high availability or the clustering configuration because that's still very basic. The elasticity or scaling of the platform needs a lot of improvement. For example, when it comes to DR handling or building an active-active or active-passive cluster, Informatica PowerCenter is still not that powerful. Automation also needs improvement in the solution. Improving automation leads to some improvement in the stability of Informatica PowerCenter and other aspects related to it. What I'd like to see in the next release of Informatica PowerCenter is real-time capability because the solution is mainly for patches, and to have real-time integration, you need to count on some additional components from Informatica. I would expect more integration and a complete platform in terms of real-time capability or patching with minimal interventions or minimal components to be aligned together."
"Its scalability can be improved. It is not scalable."
"It would be nice to have all tools in one place. CDC needs more effort, as it's only easy to develop if you are familiar with Linux."
"An issue which should be addressed is that the solution only allows us to do structured, as opposed to unstructured, data processing."
"We find we often have to go back and re-train users when there are changes made to the solution because the changes are not intuitive."
"We implemented it a while ago, and we are trying to improve the data delivery performance. We are looking into how to get faster and automated reporting. We would need better designs and workflows."
"The solution could use better documentation."
"The solution is quite expensive and hard to install/configure."
"The pricing of the solution needs to be improved. They need to work to make it more affordable."
"I would like the tool to include the ability to automate the modifications of the integrations."
"With SAS Data Management, you have to purchase an external driver, configure all of the tables for all of the data that you will extract from Salesforce. It's not a straightforward process."
"Very little needs to improve but perhaps a nicer graphic interface and remaining competetive in the growing field of data analytics."
Informatica PowerCenter is ranked 3rd in Data Integration with 78 reviews while SAS Data Management is ranked 40th in Data Integration with 15 reviews. Informatica PowerCenter is rated 8.0, while SAS Data Management is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Informatica PowerCenter writes "Stable, provides good support, and integrating it with other systems is very fast, but its pricing is expensive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAS Data Management writes "A scalable solution with customer support that is responsive and diligent". Informatica PowerCenter is most compared with Informatica Cloud Data Integration, Azure Data Factory, SSIS, Databricks and AWS Glue, whereas SAS Data Management is most compared with Microsoft Purview, Tungsten RPA, IBM InfoSphere DataStage, Collibra Governance and Palantir Foundry.
See our list of best Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Data Integration 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.