We performed a comparison between AppDynamics and Broadcom DX Application Performance Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: AppDynamics is favored over Broadcom DX Application Performance Management due to its comprehensive features, scalability, stability, and ease of use. It offers alerting, release management, dashboard building, visibility, slow response identification, and business insights. It can monitor various applications and manage log files. Although Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is easy to deploy and provides code-level visibility, it lacks tool integration, has performance issues, and lacks support and end-to-end correlation. AppDynamics also has better customer service and support and a more flexible pricing model.
"This is a stable product and we definitely plan to continue using it in the future."
"This solution not only provides answers but also provides sensor data. This allows us to quickly resolve issues that developers may take a long time to solve."
"Has helped us to increase customer acquisitions and reduce revenue leakage."
"AppDynamics is scalable."
"It helped to find quick solutions for specific business transactions."
"We can make custom alerts in our system for specific issues like high CPU utilization or application downtime."
"The real user monitoring helps us evaluate our customers' real experiences, which is valuable as an eCommerce company."
"The business transaction that stands between multiple applications is proving to be most valuable."
"Proactive snapshots of transactions and all details of a transaction are saved in case of an error."
"Product performance is awesome. It's covering all aspects of the application; good database metrics and internal application metrics. Just tons and tons of data."
"I like that it gives you a wide range of data where you can see the application outage response from concurrent locations and the number of stalled jobs."
"Standard available reports provide us with an automatic insight into the top ten situations to watch. It would have been extremely difficult to program such a report ourselves, and to my knowledge no other competitor can match this functionality."
"Attribute decoration is a unique and very powerful feature. We can add meaningful meta information based on our internal demand."
"The deep-process instrumentation gave us an opportunity to understand application process performance in detail."
"Measurement of response time"
"Service maturity when you can retrieve the normal metrics for every major aspect of each module and delivering this info to the correct eyes."
"AppDynamics scaled well up to around 3,000 agents. The performance deteriorated after that, while Dynatrace could support more than 10,000 agents. We were surprised that AppDynamics' scalability is not so good."
"There could log management features included in the product."
"I would like to see more of a unified platform. They're very, very new on the server side, machine agents. I want them to be more mature in this area."
"At this time, we don't have much visibility on the virtual environment, monitoring, and all other things. We have visibility only for database monitoring, and we have noticed performance impact when deploying database agents on the database server. We got to know this from AppDynamics support also that we should not deploy database agents from the database server. When agents are deployed on the same server and the database is monitored from there, we are not getting database server metrics. Therefore, we don't have those insights, and sometimes, we struggle because of that. They can improve this functionality so that we do not have a performance impact, and we can deploy anywhere. This would help us a lot. In terms of end-user monitoring, currently, it is not working for us because there are some complexities. It is a little complicated, and it takes a little bit of time to understand where you need to make changes. It would be very helpful if they can provide some template designs for end-user monitoring. When our servers are running on VMs, we don't get many insights from the VM side. I don't know whether it is possible to have visibility beyond the database, server, and application and whether there are some features where we can deploy AppDynamics on VMs as well. Such functionality would give us more control over storage, VM, OS, and database. It will also provide complete visibility of our hardware and software."
"Installation and configuration can be very tough. An average user without specialized knowledge can't do this. You need to have DevOps and QA teams handle it. During installation, a lot of customers get stuck trying to track the database or the API part, and they have to contact customer support."
"Sometimes, it is hard to navigate through and find if something is wrong or figure out where an error stemmed from."
"The integration part in AppDynamics with other systems is an area with a little difficulty, especially when it comes to the configuration area. The integration of AppDynamics with other products takes a lot of time."
"The QA and test environment need improvement."
"You can sell licenses and install the full tool on service, you can show customers how to install, but how to use it and solve issues cannot be done without the experience."
"The initial setup is complex."
"Dashboards need to be improved in order to make them self-explanatory."
"A CA APM agent takes a lot of memory. That is one disadvantage. If you configure CA APM correctly it will still consume around 15 to 20 percent of memory."
"Needs custom dashboards."
"The upgrade was complex. The documentation could have been a little bit better, but other than that, it was okay."
"In order for the tool to be successful, at least in our organization, it will need to have more self-serve features for implementation, instrumentation, and then modification of metric data from the APM."
"One of the challenges is agent releases. So as we employ agents, they are done relatively manually. A little bit of automating of agent release would be helpful."
More Broadcom DX Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics is ranked 2nd in Container Monitoring with 24 reviews while Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is ranked 4th in Container Monitoring with 6 reviews. AppDynamics is rated 8.2, while Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AppDynamics writes "Good tracing capabilities and helpful technical support but needs better analytics". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management writes "Provides efficiency in migration and DAW but requires a high level of administrator knowledge for configuration". AppDynamics is most compared with Dynatrace, Elastic Observability, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and New Relic, whereas Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is most compared with Dynatrace, BMC TrueSight Operations Management, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, New Relic and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our AppDynamics vs. Broadcom DX Application Performance Management report.
See our list of best Container Monitoring vendors and best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Container 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.
AppDynamics, New Relic & CA Technologies?
It all depends on the problems you want to solve. They all have their strengths. CA is long in the tooth (old) and with NetQoS has new life being pushed into it, but making it all fit is a challenge. Also with CA you may have to open up the applications to add some other custom monitoring of application package names/methods if you want more detail than out of the box.
Understanding the full flow of a transaction when it talks to other transactions was our key to understanding why we had issues. The Riverbed family of products enabled that for us but even that required work on our part to further decode the MQ traffic better than they did. It went into the MQ Black box, and came out, but did not reveal what happened inside the box. There were requests inside the box that went elsewhere. Those had not been picked up with the tool.
Cons for all of them are that they only sample transactions and can't follow a single user from their device all the way through to the backend database or mainframe. Best using dynaTrace if you want true 100% end to end monitoring.
Saluting Mike, Richard for your sound advice!
Henry
I have found Dynatrace to be much better. It integrates with more tools than any of the 3 listed above.
From my experience with CA Wily, it's more expensive and requires a long implementation, it is also less flexible.
We did not consider New Relic because we did not want to have our sensitive data hosted in the cloud. Not acceptable in our business.
AppDynamics offered a short implementation time, immediate satisfaction and only required fine-tuning afterwards. Also the pricing was lower then CA Wily.
All three are good tools for monitoring web application transactions. Of course, CA has a much broader set of capabilities than the other two - can monitor networks, servers, databases, etc. AppDynamics provides a product that you can use in-house. NewRelic is only a SaaS offering. Which of these is best for you - depends on what you need. If you already have CA deployed, you are probably looking at just web transaction monitoring then. AppDynamics and NewRelic are more current in this area than CA Wily.