We performed a comparison between Avada Software Infrared360 and IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."
"It's what we use for monitoring our MQ system, so the features that they provide are just really, really good."
"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"
"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."
"Scalability. I have never had to worry about how to handle really big environments."
"In 90% of the cases, new devices are plug-and-play, so when a new version comes out then SevOne has support for it out of the box."
"The most valuable feature as of late has been the API integration with ServiceNow."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is the scale-up and scale-down. The scale-up is an operation where the CPU boosts-up and then the memory will boost-up. That works awesomely."
"One of the most valuable features is the graphs, which you can build instantly. I have used some open-source platforms in the past, but they are not as good. With SevOne, the sampling in the graph can be every few seconds, not just every few minutes, and that's really helpful. It's really fast."
"We have benefited mainly from the use of the dashboard interface. It makes the network visually interesting for other people who are not in the network. A lot of people are not network techies who understand streams in the network. Based on location, we have streams coming in and out. They can see visually when there is some problem. They don't need to understand all the network technology behind it to be able to understand if everything is working well or if there is a problem."
"SevOne provides support for all universal connectors. They internally work with other data sources to get features implemented. We have an SD-WAN implementation and use other app data to monitor performance. If you pull that data into one centralized location, that is very useful for management."
"It also gives us the closest thing to real-time insight into network performance that we have, with just a 10-second delay. It's very important for us to know the health of the infrastructure very quickly."
"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"Some of the graphics in the interface could be improved. It's pretty basic. Some interfaces are not up to what you're used to seeing on other, more Windows-like tools."
"One area where they could improve is with their documentation. Some sections are not up to date with new release information and providing additional samples in some areas would be very helpful."
"The UI can be cumbersome - but we are still using the Viper interface and we have not had the time to check out the Alloy interface which is supposed to be much improved."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"We are still working with the FTE/MFT subscription monitoring and reporting functionality. That is an area in which we would like to see further development taking place."
"I'm not really sure if this was the software's fault or a server issue, but a couple of years back the disks were failing on our SevOne physical server every month and the server would go down. The secondary server took over from the primary until the disk issue was resolved. That was annoying."
"The tool needs improvement in non-Cisco SD-WAN."
"The one area with room for improvement is probably administration. They added data insights to make a better user experience, but I'd like to see some improvements in the way the system's administered."
"The GUI: both the dashboard/user view and the admin tool."
"I would like to see live maps as an added feature. Also, build modules on AI and EML to provide better data insights that would proactively tell us what we should be looking after."
"SevOne should work with the graphs legend functionality."
"Software upgrades can be tricky is not easy."
"There is no service mode setup in this monitoring tool if you want to snooze alerts for any specific amount of time, to account for any activity change or major incident."
More IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Avada Software Infrared360 is ranked 36th in Server Monitoring while IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is ranked 17th in Server Monitoring with 53 reviews. Avada Software Infrared360 is rated 8.8, while IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Avada Software Infrared360 writes "An offsite team performs a daily infrastructure health check and sends reports to the technical/management teams. ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) writes "We can get a new vendor certified and monitored in our system significantly faster than before". Avada Software Infrared360 is most compared with IBM MQ and Dynatrace, whereas IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is most compared with Instana Infrastructure Monitoring, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds Network Device Monitor, Splunk Enterprise Security and SolarWinds NPM. See our Avada Software Infrared360 vs. IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) report.
See our list of best Server Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Server 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.