AWS Savings Plans vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Amazon Web Services (AWS) Logo
962 views|744 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
IBM Logo
3,978 views|1,869 comparisons
98% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between AWS Savings Plans and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, VMware and others in Cloud Cost Management.
To learn more, read our detailed Cloud Cost Management Report (Updated: March 2024).
768,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The most valuable feature of AWS Savings Plans is we can discuss budgets briefly during our confirmation process since we are aware of our usual consumption patterns. Creating budgets in this regard would be beneficial, as it would allow us to consume only what we need, without including reserve instances that do not serve our purpose.""The initial setup is very easy."

More AWS Savings Plans Pros →

"The solution has a good optimization feature.""We've saved hundreds of hours. Most of the time those hours would have to be after hours as well, which are more valuable to me as that's my personal time.""It has automated a lot of things. We have saved 30 to 35 percent in human resource time and cost, which is pretty substantial. We don't have a big workforce here, so we have to use all the automation we can get.""The tool provides the ability to look at the consumption utilization over a period of time and determine if we need to change that resource allocation based on the actual workload consumption, as opposed to how IT has configured it. Therefore, we have come to realize that a lot of our workloads are overprovisioned, and we are spending more money in the public cloud than we need to.""We can manage multiple environments using a single pane of glass, which is something that I really like.""In our organization, optimizing application performance is a continuous process that is beyond human scale. We would not be able to do the number of actions that Turbonomic takes on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. It is humanly impossible with the little micro adjustments that it can make. That is a huge differentiator. If you just figure each action could take anywhere very conservatively from five to 10 minutes to act upon, then you multiply that out by thousands of actions every month, it is easily something where you could say, "I am saving a couple of FTEs."""Using this product helps us to reduce performance risk because it shows us where resources are needed but not yet allocated.""It also brings up a list of machines and if something is under-provisioned and needs more compute power it will tell you, 'This server needs more compute power, and we suggest you raise it up to this level.' It will even automatically do it for you. In Azure, you don't have to actually go into the cloud provider to resize. You can just say, 'Apply these resizes,' and Turbonomic uses some back-end APIs to make the changes for you."

More IBM Turbonomic Pros →

Cons
"The visibility of AWS Savings Plans could improve.""In the future, it would be interesting if there could be a combination of Savings Plans and some Reserved Servers."

More AWS Savings Plans Cons →

"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.""In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings.""They could add a few more reports. They could also be a bit more granular. While they have reports, sometimes it is hard to figure out what you are looking for just by looking at the date.""I would love to see Turbonomic analyze backup data. We have had people in the past put servers into daily full backups with seven-year retention and where the disk size is two terabytes. So, every single day, there is a two terabyte snapshot put into a Blob somewhere. I would love to see Turbonomic say, "Here are all your backups along with the age of them," to help us manage the savings by not having us spend so much on the storage in Azure. That would be huge.""The issue for us with the automation is we are considering starting to do the hot adds, but there are some problems with Windows Server 2019 and hot adds. It is a little buggy. So, if we turn that on with a cluster that has a lot of Windows 2019 Servers, then we would see a blue screen along with a lot of applications as well. Depending on what you are adding, cores or memory, it doesn't necessarily even take advantage of that at that moment. A reboot may be required, and we can't do that until later. So, that decreases the benefit of the real-time. For us, there is a lot of risk with real-time.""There is an opportunity for improvement with some of Turbonomic's permissions internally for role-based access control. We would like the ability to come up with some customized permissions or scope permissions a bit differently than the product provides.""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.""Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing."

More IBM Turbonomic Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "We felt the pricing was very fair for the product. It is in no way prohibitive for larger deployments, unlike other similar product on the market."
  • "Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."
  • "What I can advise is to trial the product, taking advantage of the Turbonomic pre-sales implemention support and kickstart training."
  • "Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."
  • "You should understand the cost of your physical servers and how much time and money you are spending year over year on expanding your virtual farm."
  • "Price is a big one. VMTurbo was very competitively priced."
  • "If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."
  • "It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."
  • More IBM Turbonomic Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Cost Management solutions are best for your needs.
    768,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature of AWS Savings Plans is we can discuss budgets briefly during our confirmation process since we are aware of our usual consumption patterns. Creating budgets in this regard… more »
    Top Answer:The visibility of AWS Savings Plans could improve.
    Top Answer:I am using AWS Savings Plans for some proof of concepts and to control our budgets.
    Top Answer:I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company before IBM's purchase, it was compatible with other tools.
    Top Answer:I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can add Azure NetApp Files. They can add Azure Blob storage. They have already added… more »
    Top Answer:I mostly provide it to my clients. There are multiple reasons why they would use it depending on the client's needs and their solution.
    Ranking
    6th
    Views
    962
    Comparisons
    744
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    357
    Rating
    8.0
    1st
    Views
    3,978
    Comparisons
    1,869
    Reviews
    16
    Average Words per Review
    1,455
    Rating
    8.5
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
    Learn More
    IBM
    Video Not Available
    Interactive Demo
    Overview

    Savings Plans is a flexible pricing model that provides savings of up to 72% on your AWS compute usage. This pricing model offers lower prices on Amazon EC2 instances usage, regardless of instance family, size, OS, tenancy or AWS Region, and also applies to AWS Fargate usage.

    IBM Turbonomic is a performance and cost optimization platform for public, private, and hybrid clouds used by customers to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications through automated actions. Common use cases include cloud cost optimization, cloud migration planning, data center modernization, FinOps acceleration, Kubernetes optimization, sustainable IT, and application resource management. Turbonomic customers report an average 33% reduction in cloud and infrastructure waste without impacting application performance, and return-on-investment of 471% over three years. Ready to take a closer look? Explore the interactive demo or start your free 30-day trial today!

    Sample Customers
    bp, Cerner, Expedia, Finra, HESS, intuit, Kellog's, Philips, TIME, workday
    IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Insurance Company7%
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company6%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise69%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise23%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Buyer's Guide
    Cloud Cost Management
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, VMware and others in Cloud Cost Management. Updated: March 2024.
    768,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    AWS Savings Plans is ranked 6th in Cloud Cost Management with 2 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 1st in Cloud Cost Management with 204 reviews. AWS Savings Plans is rated 9.0, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AWS Savings Plans writes "Low maintenance, scales well, and straightforward implementation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "The solution reduced our operational expenditures and is able to identify points before we even noticed them ". AWS Savings Plans is most compared with Azure Cost Management, Zesty and Cloudability, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth and VMware vSphere.

    See our list of best Cloud Cost Management vendors.

    We monitor all Cloud Cost Management 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.