BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. CA Performance Management

As of May 2019, BMC TrueSight Operations Management is ranked 18th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 9 reviews vs CA Performance Management which is ranked 11th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 14 reviews. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Operations Management writes "Enables us to proactively service our customers and even warn them about problems before they occur". The top reviewer of CA Performance Management writes "Enables us to baseline, trend, historically view performance, and see in real time how the infrastructure is performing". BMC TrueSight Operations Management is most compared with Splunk, AppDynamics and Dynatrace. CA Performance Management is most compared with CA eHealth, SevOne and SolarWinds NPM. See our BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. CA Performance Management report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. CA Performance Management and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
341,120 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
I find the product's scalability to be one of the most valuable features since it allows us to add unlimited devices for monitoring and to set up additional polling servers without additional license cost or downtime in our monitoring.The product is available in ISO image format, ready for deployment. Centreon also has a comprehensive guide and documentation that are simple and easy to follow.The most important feature is that it permits us to receive alarms if there is an incident within the infrastructure. The feature I love the most is the reporting feature, the MBI (Monitoring Business Intelligence) which permits us to send advanced reports to our customers in PDF format or in Doc format. We also deploy Centreon Map which gives our customers intuitive views of their information system.We are alerted on service impacts and not when something is down. We have saved a lot of time on non-business-hours intervention.What I like most about Centreon is that it is very flexible and customizable, based on the user and/or business needs. Centreon is very flexible when it comes to monitoring parameters. We can use scripts found on the internet or scripts created by our infra/apps team. Also, the data visualization features are very simple and straightforward, yet very informative.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.I really like the filtering capabilities of it. You can easily tell what's critical next to what's okay, the state of the services. It's very easy to get the whole picture quickly.E-mail alert notifications are valuable.

Read more »

The ability of this platform to monitor the very diverse assets that we maintain around the world is its most valuable feature... We support a vast array of manufacturers' equipment, like HP, IBM, Cisco, Dell, EMC, Hitachi... We can do it all with [this] one [solution].The fact that they have a very integrated relationship with Sentry Software, the Knowledge Module, is valuable... The richest feature for us is the number of Knowledge Modules that we can load into the product to add breadth of service to the customer. It enables us to move up the operational stack from hardware, to operating system, to application, and to cloud... That enables us to provide one pane of glass over all those layers - hardware, OS, app, and cloud.Valuable features include wide support for monitoring, strong event management, service management capability, baselining (analytics) and easy to integrate other tools with it.It provides common administration, and a Single Sign-On Platform with RBAC, which eases the cross launch between multiple toolsThe tailoring of the knowledge modules has been particularly useful as I can streamline the agents to only report on critical events.It is very helpful to be able to apply rule-based routing to alerts.TSOM's ability to consolidate alerts into a single location and provide filtering of alerts is great.It has provided us with a single location to host all events to be viewed/monitored by our NOC. This has greatly helped them to streamline their processes.

Read more »

The capability where not only the traditional SNMP information is captured but also the netflow data; who is consuming the data on the WAN, and voice-related information, is helpful. The voice quality makes it very easy for first- and second-line operators to see where the issue is, and who is impacted.The ability to very quickly and graphically navigate around, being able to zoom in to a timeframe, apply it to all the other panels... are all very intuitive.I can get it to run a report showing, for instance, what root drives are in the critical range in terms of being full, like 90 percent full, and disseminate that information to the other areas of the organization.The feature that is inherent to its core, of being able to graphically represent a trend and status, is nice.You can create intelligent alerts so you have enough time to replace the router or interface before it's full. The same is applicable for CBQoS channels.​It is the gathering of the whole performance data in our environment and our network environment, for us and our customers.You can have thousands of devices inside and hundreds of thousands of interphases without a problem.We're able to present data from multiple back-end collection sources into a single dashboard for the users. So they don't have to go to multiple locations to get data about a particular item, or device.

Read more »

Cons
The Home view could be improved by adding customization functions that allow users to change the size of the widgets for a more uniform layout.Centreon technical support is only available during Central European business hours. When it comes to critical business solutions, there should be a 24/7 hotline that customers can rely on.I would like to see a better UI, one which is more responsive.The most important issue is the capability to interconnect with other systems. It already exists for some of them. For example, the Stream Connector is something we use to populate data in another system. This kind of facility for connecting should exist for all products that it makes sense to have connected to a monitoring solution.Centreon needs to improve the granularity of the data as well as the graphical data. It would also be better to if there was improvement to the filtering/grouping system as well as the creation of views.There are improvements that they need to make to their API. When we're using different systems and we want to disable monitoring for a specific server, we still can't do that through the API. That's something that's lacking.This solution lacks service monitoring in the cloud.It is necessary to improve service monitoring of database services in the free version.

Read more »

We have a unique use case because BMC typically sells this solution into enterprises that are deploying it within their IT, versus to a managed services provider like us where we're supporting thousands of customers. Multi-tenancy and the scalability have been challenges along the way, as we've grown... If anything could have gone better as we were ramping this up and adding a lot of volume to it, I would say it's the scalability. That would be one thing that could be improved.Reporting would be an area for improvement in TrueSight... We have almost 800 customers today on TrueSight and just under 10,000 assets. We need to be able to give a customer some information. If the customer's product fails, they'll ask us, "Did it have a problem beforehand?" We have all those events and we know all the problems it had beforehand. We have to be able to give them access to that kind of reporting. That's an enhancement that we need.Deployment requires lots of resources (servers). It has too many consoles.The knowledge modules could be more lightweight in size. At present, the installation packages can be quite large.BMC's solutions for cloud monitoring (monitoring of AWS and Azure resources) are very poor in stability and customization.BMC's online documentation is often incorrect or incomplete.I would really like to see out-of-the-box support for monitoring uninterruptible power supplies.More modules for less popular applications and better documentation.

Read more »

It could be a little easier to integrate new metrics.This may be available by now but for server space, when it comes to the disk file system, I'd like to see that graphically represented, or the trend, rather than what I'm seeing now.The quantity of views which are tied to specific metric families is too high. Also, the problem is the view doesn't tell you which metric family it uses, so you don't know why you don't see data.For CA PM, there should be a way of easily migrating the reports coming from eHealth going to CA Performance Center, since CA PC is replacing eHealth.It needs role-based administration.Product has issue collecting IP SLA data.Install is done as root, which is a security no-no, and the database IO requirements were not stated correctly, which lead to a year of instability.CA PM Business Hours Filtering: I understand that all monitoring systems have defects. The Business Hours Filtering does not always function properly. Sometimes, when applying business hours to CA PM reports that are 30 or more days in duration, the report generation times out and does not display results. We have other CA PM reports that, when we apply Business Hours Filtering, the report results displayed are the same as without the filter. We are not sure if this is a defect in CA PM or if it is a result of our complex configuration (folder structure) and application of business hours.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Open-source solutions like this can be very cost effective for an organization looking for a product that they can quickly implement, as there is no initial cost and there are no license renewal fees. However, it is important to take into consideration some of the related costs that may come along as needed, such as training, support, and product enhancements.The solution is very effective, despite the low price.I think Centreon's pricing is fair, especially given the criticality of our system. They were cheaper than the other solutions. The licensing terms were pretty straightforward. I believe it was based on the number of hosts.The pricing is acceptable.They only sell four hour slots for support, so if you have just one question, then you need to pay for four hours. Or, you need to wait until you have enough questions to fill those four hours. They are not flexible in this.For more complex tasks, we use prepaid support days and ask Centreon to come onsite.Centreon is an open source product. Thus, there is no need for licensing.It's quite expensive when you use the Enterprise version, but if you compare it to other providers, it's more like a middle-of-the-line product. It's always good to have a price that is lower, but I would say the price is okay because we get very good support and if we have any other issues we can always contact them. There has never been a time when I didn't get help from them.

Read more »

Pricing is all volume-driven. I think we were paying between $80 and $85 per license. That's per unit, for a perpetual license. You pay it one time and then, every year, you pay 20 percent of that for annual maintenance and support. But now that we've grown, we've purchased tens of thousands of licenses and the cost per license has gone down to something like less than $30...We pay license fees of between $150 and $200 per asset. There is an enterprise software license fee, and then you pay a percentage for your maintenance, and then Premier Support. For example, if you buy a two-year license for the product, then the maintenance fee is added to that for two years at X percent a year. Then there's a small fee on top of that for Premier Support...Pricing is very high.The solutions are not the cheapest but are robust and stable. License model is rather complex and BMC do often change the model.

Read more »

I like the licensing model because it's device-based.They should provide more scalable licensing for the product.Do your homework and know how many devices you will be managing out of the gate. Be sure to project what your growth will be each year.We were looking at other vendors in the marketplace for NetFlow, and CA just beat everybody else in price, cost, and the size to implement. ​

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
341,120 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Comparisons
Compared 37% of the time.
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Also Known As
ProactiveNet, TrueSight Operations Management
Learn
Centreon
BMC
CA Technologies
Overview
The Centreon solution, based on a free to download Open Source Platform, monitors all critical IT Infrastructure and Applications with real-time dashboards, analytics and insightful alerts that prevent business-impacting downtimes. Since 2005, over 200,000 IT professionals from SMBs and Fortune 500 companies rely on Centreon to guarantee their organization operational performance.

The BMCProactiveNet Performance Management Suite is made up of a number of essential components that will allow end-users to proactively manage their physical,virtual and cloud environments.

By combining capacity and performance analytics, ProactiveNet aligns IT enterprise and cloud systems to business demands, ultimately creating more intelligent and proactive business processes. ProactiveNet allows business needs and demands to be the driver of the IT system, and not the other way round, with the result being optimized resources, reduced risks and costs, and higher performance levels within the business.

CA Performance Management is a comprehensive and highly scalable network performance monitoring and analytics platform. It was built to meet the unique demands of big data and modern networks architectures, including highly dynamic and complex hybrid cloud and software-defined networks (SDN).

The platform is design to reduce complexity inherent in modern networks built across numerous technology stacks through advanced network performance monitoring and relationship mapping for improved operational assurance.

Combined with CA Virtual Network Assurance, the platform extends operator visibility through advanced discovery and network performance monitoring of highly sensitive cloud and multi-layered SDN networks and service chains.

Offer
Learn more about Centreon
Learn more about BMC TrueSight Operations Management
Learn more about CA Performance Management
Sample Customers
Airbus, Bollore, BT, Canal Plus, Kuehne Nagel, Limagrain, LVMH, Oberthur Technologies, Orange, Darty, Addax Petroleum, Plastic Omnium, Auchan, Valeo, Saint Gobin, Clarins, Hugo Boss, JC Decaux, French Government (Defense, Justice, Environment, Agriculture), OptiComm, Thales, Zeiss. Bank of East Asia and China E-Port. Jack Henry & Assoc, Target, CenturyLink, Bell Canada, BrightHouse Networks, Telus, Unisys, Verizon, Southern California Edison, GEICO, Fidelity Investments, Wells Fargo, American Family Insurance Group, Deutsche Telekom AG 
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider19%
Financial Services Firm17%
Energy/Utilities Company16%
Logistics Company14%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Insurance Company29%
Financial Services Firm21%
Comms Service Provider14%
Retailer14%
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. CA Performance Management and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
341,120 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure 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.

Sign Up with Email