We performed a comparison between Centreon and Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The downtimes feature is helpful. If the ISP is doing some maintenance on its network, we have the option to put downtime on the devices or the services, so we won't get any false alarms."
"What we like about it is that, whereas with Nagios, by design, if you have five or six data centers, you have to open five or six web pages to see what's going on, In Centreon, this is all included in one page, a single site, one dashboard. You don't have to jump from one specific dashboard to the other."
"Centreon helps me detect where the problem is quickly. When we resolve a problem quickly, this lowers our overall costs."
"I can't point to one valuable feature. All of Centreon is good."
"Valuable features include the ability to schedule downtime, intensity or depth of monitoring which it does, different plugin packs, Centreon MAP, Centreon BI."
"The customizable reports and dashboards are really flexible. We started this partnership with Centreon, when we were looking for a solution, because of the flexibility of the reporting. That's what we found to be most attractive in the solution. You can display the data as you want."
"It is decentralized, which is better, because you can reduce the load from a single system. Also, you get a better view because it's more independent. Then, for the management, it's nice because they have one central system. With that, they can manage all the other systems, as well. This means they don't have to configure each system by system. They can configure it from one single interface."
"It supports active monitoring so we don't have to use traps. From time to time traps are not very useful because we never know if they are actually working or not. The reporting part is also valuable as are the event logs. Using them we can check right away if something has had a hiccup."
"I like the monitoring feature."
"Provides visibility into the performance uptime."
"The features that I have found most valuable are its graphs - if I need any statistics, in Kubernetes or Kong level or VPN level, I can quickly get the reports."
"Offers a valuable logging transport feature"
"The most valuable feature is the multi-cloud integration, where there is support for both GCP and AWS."
"We find the solution to be stable."
"Our company has a corporate account for Google Cloud and so our systems and clusters integrate really well."
"It's easy to use."
More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Pros →
"Centreon is very bad with auto-scanning. It's very monolithic software. It doesn't have microservices and it only has basic clustering. You cannot, for example, have six or seven nodes for Centreon's cloud processes."
"Currently, we have to go through all of the different templates and take a look at how the template is configured, and how specific parameters may change across different templates with different precedents, megatons, etc. It's a lot of work and involves trial and error. I wish they could simplify the process."
"During the initial setup we faced some issues. Part of it was because we had to become more knowledgeable in the solution. There are some gray areas and if you don't know the product well you may have issues. Another part of it was some bugs that we came across, although that's part of every software solution in IT nowadays. But the initial setup could be easier."
"This solution lacks service monitoring in the cloud."
"I think Centreon's security could be improved by leveraging AI. That's where things are heading in the industry."
"Centreon introduced network discovery in the most recent update. However, it doesn't work well. Our previous monitoring tool could discover networking equipment on the network and identify the relationships between the devices."
"I went through a few things with them to do with Centreon MAP, to do with active polygons, being able to draw an area and make that active. The functionality was in the older version of Centreon MAP and in the new version, which was a complete rewrite, they dropped it."
"Improvements are needed in the area of cloud monitoring, as that's a newer feature."
"It could be more stable."
"It is difficult to estimate in advance how much something is going to cost."
"The process of logging analytics can be improved"
"This solution could be improved if it offered the ability to analyze charts, such as a solution like Kibana."
"The product provides minimal metrics that are insufficient."
"It could be even more automated."
"While we are satisfied with the overall performance, in certain cases we must add additional metrics and additional tools like Grafana and Dynatrace."
"Lacking sufficient operations documentation."
More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Cons →
More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Centreon is ranked 12th in Cloud Monitoring Software with 27 reviews while Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is ranked 23rd in Cloud Monitoring Software with 10 reviews. Centreon is rated 8.6, while Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Centreon writes "Proactive reporting guides our NOC on what needs to be fixed, saving them time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) writes "Good logging and tracing but does need more profiling capabilities". Centreon is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios Core, Icinga and Datadog, whereas Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is most compared with AWS X-Ray, Datadog, Azure Monitor, New Relic and Amazon CloudWatch. See our Centreon vs. Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) report.
See our list of best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Cloud 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.