We performed a comparison between ITRS Geneos and Zabbix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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 flexibility of the product is most valuable. It is highly customizable. If you put your mind to it and think of something you could do, there's a good possibility you can get it integrated within the console, if it's not readily available. The simplicity or ease of customization has been valuable."
"This solution has helped provide relief to existing Level 2 teams, allowing them to focus efforts on in-depth problem analysis."
"In my experience, being able to monitor our databases is a valuable feature as we can create our own queries and aren't reliant on the in-built ones."
"The ability to completely tailor and customize what it's monitoring is one of its strongest points. A lot of other monitoring tools are good at certain things, but one of my colleagues described it as the “Swiss Army Knife” of monitoring tools. It can do anything you want."
"The great advantage of this tool is real-time monitoring."
"Geneos automatically sends email notifications when any batch job fails, the database is down or the website is down. It is automatically monitoring everything and reduces manual effort."
"It enables us to monitor application processes, to do log-monitoring on a 24/7 basis, to do server-level monitoring - all the hardware parameters - as well as monitor connectivity across applications to the interfaces."
"I would say that it is an easy-to-use monitoring tool. Amongst the available monitoring tools, it is a really good option."
"I really enjoy network traffic triggers that allow us to check traffic threshold from ISP."
"The flexibility of this solution is amazing."
"During my testing, the features that I like the most are that it can be integrated with my system, and it provides me with reports of all of my servers."
"The initial setup was not complex."
"The integration capabilities and APIs are the best part."
"It has good graphs of what is going on within the operating system."
"The performance and bandwidth are valuable features."
"The level of discovery-based configuration that lets us auto-configure the monitoring for various systems is a valuable feature."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I would also like to see suggested guidelines to accomplish a monitoring task. The issue is that ITRS is so flexible that there is more than one way to complete a task, each with benefits and disadvantages."
"One area where there is room for improvement is the log file. I would like to be able to do a pre-run on the log files. When you are testing log files for regular expressions, it would be good to be able to do a quick check up front on that side of things before you release that into production."
"Data visualization – real time and historical – is a weakness."
"t needs to have better middleware integration for things such as application and Microsft SQL servers."
"Backward compatibility with deprecated features and in system documentation on what configuration areas are needed to be updated."
"ITRS have started to make some major changes that we haven't taken on board yet, in the creation of dashboards and more visibility of the metrics that we collect. At the moment, that's something that's lacking, but I know they have addressed it. Still, it’s not that easy to create stuff to help with visibility and dashboarding in Geneos."
"The deployment method for upgrading is a bit tricky. It takes a little bit of manual effort. If that could be a bit more automated, it would help us a lot."
"The main feature that needs work is the Dashboard designer."
"The event correlation could be better."
"Zabbix technical support is sold separately."
"If you want to use all of the features then you have to pay a licensing fee."
"There are not too much documentation or manuals. We found the tutorials very easy to understand but do not go deep enough in the use of Zabbix. We need more manuals, proper use, documentation, etc."
"The user interface could be better."
"There are some features of Zabbix that are not good for reporting. The DX Spectrum solution has better reporting."
"Zabbix could improve when it comes to large-scale use cases. Additionally, the inventory could be better when connecting to other solutions, such as ServiceNow. There show to be better integration with other platforms and storage."
"When using this solution in enterprise monitoring, you are able to see that there are some issues with equipment that could be causing a problem. Sometimes you want to make a root command that you do not want to be executed automatically. What we have tried to do is open an SSH session directly from the solution's interface but it is not possible."
ITRS Geneos is ranked 11th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 57 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 10th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 98 reviews. ITRS Geneos is rated 8.2, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ITRS Geneos writes "The flexible dashboard sets it apart from competing tools, but it's costly and lacks scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". ITRS Geneos is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Grafana and Prometheus, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, SolarWinds NPM, Nagios XI and Nagios Core. See our ITRS Geneos vs. Zabbix report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.