We compared SCOM and Zabbix based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Based on the user reviews, SCOM is praised for its monitoring capabilities, ease of use, and seamless integration with Microsoft products. Users report positive experiences with SCOM's customer service, promptness, and efficiency. Meanwhile, Zabbix stands out for its robust performance, customization options, and customer service excellence. Users appreciate Zabbix's ability to monitor various parameters with ease and its user-friendly interface. However, users have suggested improvements in areas such as interface intuitiveness, documentation support, customization options, and integration capabilities.
Features: Based on user feedback, SCOM is praised for its robust monitoring capabilities, real-time alerts, seamless integration with other Microsoft products, and efficient troubleshooting capabilities. On the other hand, Zabbix stands out with its ease of monitoring and tracking various parameters, extensive customization options, and user-friendly dashboards facilitating data management and visualization. Overall, both products offer valuable features but with different strengths and focus areas.
Pricing and ROI: SCOM's setup cost has been found to be manageable and not requiring significant investments, according to user feedback. The licensing is straightforward and flexible, offering convenient usage. On the other hand, Zabbix offers a reasonably priced solution with a straightforward setup process. The licensing model is flexible and accommodating for different business needs., The feedback from users highlights the differences between SCOM and Zabbix in terms of return on investment (ROI). Users express satisfaction with Zabbix's performance, capabilities, and customization options, emphasizing its ability to monitor and analyze network and server performance, detect issues in real-time, and optimize resources for enhanced operational performance.
Room for Improvement: SCOM users have suggested enhancing the interface to be more intuitive, improving reporting capabilities, integrating with other software, and enhancing performance and stability. On the other hand, Zabbix could enhance its user interface, improve documentation for troubleshooting and setup, provide easier customization options, and better integration with external systems.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews for SCOM indicate varying timeframes for deployment and setup, with some users taking three months for deployment and others taking a week for setup. However, one user mentioned taking a week for both deployment and setup. On the other hand, the reviews for Zabbix show some users spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while others required a week for both. It is important to consider the context in which the terms are used., SCOM's customer service and support have received positive remarks, with users describing it as prompt, helpful, and knowledgeable. On the other hand, Zabbix's customer service and support are highly praised and regarded as excellent, with users appreciating their expertise and strong commitment to resolving issues efficiently.
The summary above is based on 34 interviews we conducted recently with SCOM and Zabbix users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"It is very good at monitoring Microsoft Server."
"This solution saves us a lot of work because it reduces the effort that is required in order to start monitoring."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"The solution's reporting engine has given me detailed information on which applications or services I've either failed or about to fail in terms of the predictive makeup on Azure cloud."
"It has good graphs of what is going on within the operating system."
"The most valuable feature of SCOM is real-time alerts."
"This solution helps our application teams by allowing them to drill further into issues and perform a root cause analysis."
"It discovers the components automatically, which is a fantastic thing. The discovery works in an automatic way, and it has a dynamic way of discovering the components, assets, and applications. It doesn't require any manual intervention."
"The product is very stable."
"We are able to monitor our virtual infrastructure, virtual machines, windows servers, databases, and the network using a simple network management protocol. We are able to pull almost all the metrics that we want, receive notifications, and have them integrate with telegrams for certain devices that are critical, such as UPSs."
"It provides high scalability, alerting, notification, templating, and end-to-end security."
"Zabbix is both stable and scalable."
"Zabbix is scalable."
"SNMP monitoring, source discovery, and alert triggering are most valuable."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides network segregation for server monitoring."
"The initial setup was very quick. The first time it was long because I didn't know it yet. I was only using Windows. The first time was very difficult because of the operating system."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"It'll help if they can provide real-time or closer to real-time monitoring."
"I would like to better be able to monitor Oracle processes."
"The configurations could be better. There are multiple tests where you can do something, but they can be a trigger as well. The overriding methodologies are not that easy. The configurations are difficult. The configuration and thorough day-to-day operations to get them to the level you want takes some time. It's very difficult."
"It would be a much better product if Microsoft provided management packs with the product."
"We didn't know the solution enough, and therefore, it took a while to set everything up correctly. There was a learning curve."
"The solution should be more user-friendly and offer a better user interface."
"There could be more integration of SIM in the solution."
"The solution’s initial setup is difficult."
"There are areas of improvement. The database grows really fast. So, when you install Zabbix, you have to deal with some issues, like the database. We become pretty big very fast."
"I am having difficulties connecting it to Grafana, as well as some of the other plugins like Kibana."
"Correlation of events would be a wonderful addition."
"We would like to see the addition of automatic push functionality to this product. This would save time when monitoring our servers and networks as, at present, we have to manually install the Zabbix agent on any hardware to be monitored."
"It could be more stable."
"An area for improvement would be the ease of doing aggregation from the value or different devices."
"The documentation could be improved."
"If Zabbix had a better dashboard then it would be nice."
SCOM is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 77 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 1st in Network Monitoring Software with 98 reviews. SCOM is rated 7.8, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics, Nagios XI and ManageEngine OpManager, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, SolarWinds NPM, Nagios XI and Lenovo XClarity Controller. See our SCOM vs. Zabbix report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software 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.