We performed a comparison between OpsRamp and ScienceLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Event Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of OpsRamp include a single pane of glass, event correlation, personalized dashboards, and a single platform solution."
"We find the products seamless integration with Zendesk to be extremely valuable to our business."
"It greatly assists small and medium-sized businesses in using the ITSM, alerting, and monitoring features."
"The feature we found most valuable in OpsRamp is alert generation because whenever there is any kind of spike on any virtual machine, the solution generates alerts based on the thresholds we implemented. We have integrated our ideas and tools with OpsRamp, so alerts are generated, then we notify the customers. That's the main feature we like about OpsRamp because we don't have to monitor each resource. Instead, OpsRamp does the monitoring for us, and it generates the alerts based on the thresholds."
"The most valuable feature of OpsRamp is the creation of the dashboards of the infrastructure for the CPU memory and SQL servers. Additionally, URL monitoring through Selenium scripting and the availability dashboard is useful."
"Predictive analysis is a valued feature."
"Most features work fine."
"The most valuable feature of this solution in my experience, is that the available reporting is quite accurate."
"The power flow is great."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"The flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"We would like this solution to be developed into a full CMP tool, so that we are able to use a single product for all of our cloud management needs."
"An area of improvement would be application monitoring."
"What's lacking in OpsRamp is process automation, and if there is, I wish there could be more of it, other than just spikes, or it would be better if the alerts can be generated based on different matrices. That option is absent in OpsRamp at the moment, and it would be valuable if that could be provided in the solution, especially if there's any kind of security issue in the VM."
"The function to search any particular device within this solution needs to be improved. Currently, the solution develops a lag when a search, or a comparison, is being carried out."
"We have 55 AVDs, and patches might roll out to 32-35 initially, with the rest taking a month or so. OpsRamp can't detect them all directly. Since clients want patches applied as soon as possible, we manually patch those remaining devices."
"OpsRamp cannot be scaled for big and large company deployments."
"OpsRamp could improve the critical alerts. We have been receiving some false alerts when monitoring. For example, the alert shows the site is down, but when we try to do manual access to the URL, it's accessible."
"I would like to see two things. The first is a self-service portal for the cloud, any cloud deployments, and the second is maturity validation towards ITSM, internalizing OpsRamp TSM. As a result, instead of integrating with more mature tools similar to ServiceNow, people will use OpsRamp."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"From a performance perspective, it needs to improve a lot."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"The product is not user-friendly."
OpsRamp is ranked 4th in Event Monitoring with 10 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 5th in Event Monitoring with 42 reviews. OpsRamp is rated 7.8, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OpsRamp writes "Automates Azure resource monitoring and inventory management but slow with real-time patch status ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". OpsRamp is most compared with ServiceNow IT Operations Management, Datadog, SolarWinds NPM, LogicMonitor and OpenText Operations Bridge, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and ServiceNow IT Operations Management. See our OpsRamp vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Event Monitoring vendors, best AIOps vendors, and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Event Monitoring 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.