We performed a comparison between IBM Turbonomic and Veeam ONE based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Virtualization Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage multiple environments using a single pane of glass, which is something that I really like."
"The ability to monitor and automate both the right-sizing of VMs as well as to automate the vMotion of VMs across ESXi hosts."
"The biggest value I'm getting out of VMTurbo right now is the complete hands-off management of equalizing the usage in my data center."
"The automation and orchestration components are definitely the best part, as you can tell it what it can do and when, and just let it be."
"The notifications saying, "This is a corrective action," even though some of them can be automated, are always welcome to see. They summarize your entire infrastructure and how you can better utilize it. That is the biggest feature."
"We have seen a 30% performance improvement overall."
"The primary features we have focused on are reporting and optimization."
"The most important feature to us is an objective measurement of VM headroom per cluster. In addition, the ability to check for the right-sizing of VMs."
"The solution is simple to use."
"The monthly reports come complete with graphs and summaries, it's really helpful."
"Veeam ONE is a straightforward solution and compatible with almost all hardware."
"Storage gateway feature is very flexible."
"Veeam ONE is a very good management product...The technical support is very good, and I think it's one of the best. The response time is very quick."
"The most valuable features of Veeam ONE are the backup reports, such as the status of the storage."
"As a manager, I find Veeam One's reporting service to be very helpful."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"It would be good for Turbonomic, on their side, to integrate with other companies like AppDynamics or SolarWinds or other monitoring softwares. I feel that the actual monitoring of applications, mixed in with their abilities, would help. That would be the case wherever Turbonomic lacks the ability to monitor an application or in cases where applications are so customized that it's not going to be able to handle them. There is monitoring that you can do with scripting that you may not be able to do with Turbonomic."
"The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines."
"It would be nice for them to have a way to do something with physical machines, but I know that is not their strength Thankfully, the majority of our environment is virtual, but it would be nice to see this type of technology across some other platforms. It would be nice to have capacity planning across physical machines."
"Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing."
"We don't use Turbonomic for FinOps and part of the reason is its cost reporting. The reporting could be much more robust and, if that were the case, I could pitch it for FinOps."
"I like the detail I get in the old user interface and will miss some of that in the new interface when we perform our planned upgrade soon."
"They have a long road map when we ask for certain things that will make the product better. It takes time, but that's understandable because there are other things that are higher on the priority list."
"If they would educate their customers to understand the latest updates, that would help customers... Also, there are a lot of features that are not available in Turbonomic. For example, PaaS component optimization and automation are still in the development phase."
"The solution could improve the performance. We are not able to check the status of any system. Additionally, if there was an option to monitor server clusters it would be helpful."
"If you don't have technical knowledge about these services, monitoring the virtual machines is hard."
"Perhaps the interface could be improved, though it has always been fine for me."
"Sometimes, it's a little difficult for me to use its user interface. Its scope is very big with a lot of tuning, settings, and so on. If it's difficult for me, it must also be difficult for our customers."
"They need to support more platforms."
"Veeam's biggest limitation is the lack of integration. I can't use the tool because there is no integration between the tool and the environment."
"In future releases, I would like to see more automation capabilities. It could integrate with automation services to automatically resolve identified issues rather than simply providing instructions to the user."
"The pricing is very high."
IBM Turbonomic is ranked 3rd in Virtualization Management Tools with 204 reviews while Veeam ONE is ranked 5th in Virtualization Management Tools with 57 reviews. IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8, while Veeam ONE is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "The solution reduced our operational expenditures and is able to identify points before we even noticed them ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veeam ONE writes "A tool useful to monitor infrastructures and for backup purposes that needs to improve its deployment process". IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, Cisco Intersight, VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth and VMware vSphere, whereas Veeam ONE is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, VMware Aria Operations, VMware vSphere, Zabbix and Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring. See our IBM Turbonomic vs. Veeam ONE report.
See our list of best Virtualization Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Virtualization Management Tools 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.
