We performed a comparison between DX Performance Management and SCOM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The solution's performance itself is very good because it is a vertical database that loads very fast in comparison to other products."
"The tool helps us understand network performance."
"We have been able to get a little bit better at seeing more things in real time and more just in time, so we're less reactionary."
"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."
"There is another component of the tool called Network Flow Analysis. It gives us the ability to troubleshoot issues which do not appear right away."
"It is very easy to add devices; just be aware that it requires SNMP to be enabled."
"When we deployed it, right out of the box we were able to stand up Performance Management within two weeks, in our production environment, with full discovery and relevant information, actual information, that we could use in our command center, our 24/7 operations center."
"When devices are having performance issues, it proactively build dashboards which allow us to go and do health checks, and resolve problems before they become an issue."
"It takes a lot of the headache out of managing your data centers and software in other places."
"The most valuable feature of SCOM is the capability of using classes within your management pack development."
"The monitoring features are the most valuable. We have seen a major benefit from that so far."
"It is a user-friendly product that requires almost no maintenance."
"SCOM has improved our organization by simplifying the monitoring process. The system tells you what the bi-weekly or monthly usage was and that enables us to report this information to the manager. It shows if there was a connectivity issue that needs to be fixed and it's easier to concentrate on what needs to get fixed. System errors, therefore, get fixed faster."
"Availability monitoring is the feature I have found most valuable, as well as the capacity and ability to send notifications."
"This solution saves us a lot of work because it reduces the effort that is required in order to start monitoring."
"The solution's reporting engine has given me detailed information on which applications or services I've either failed or about to fail in terms of the predictive makeup on Azure cloud."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Since we are out of registered IP space, we are moving to ipv6 and we expect our vendors to move with us, and they have not delivered yet."
"CA PM can be complex to build and configure. Creating the folders / groups / sites required establishing many rule sets."
"This solution's implementation process could be quicker. They could also optimize the hardware requirements."
"This solution is not very scalable."
"There are some areas in the technology right now, like with VMs, where we are lacking with our abilities to get inside the VM to monitor traffic within the machine."
"It would be helpful if CA provided online training for its customers."
"It needs role-based administration."
"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."
"There are some negative points about this product. Sometimes, the capabilities of the software don't appear, and you can't directly see the results. You have to wait for a long period to refresh the policy to push it to the software or other patches."
"It could use some system enhancements, such as better dashboards."
"We didn't know the solution enough, and therefore, it took a while to set everything up correctly. There was a learning curve."
"The initial setup should be easier to complete."
"Stability and some performance issues exist and they need improvement."
"The solution should be more user-friendly and offer a better user interface."
"The configurations could be better. There are multiple tests where you can do something, but they can be a trigger as well. The overriding methodologies are not that easy. The configurations are difficult. The configuration and thorough day-to-day operations to get them to the level you want takes some time. It's very difficult."
"Regarding certain issues in the solution, it can be difficult to generate reports if we have a program that is not user-friendly for reporting. While this is not necessarily negative, we may need to use another solution."
DX Performance Management is ranked 36th in Network Monitoring Software with 31 reviews while SCOM is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 77 reviews. DX Performance Management is rated 8.2, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of DX Performance Management writes "The vertical database loads faster than any other product available". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". DX Performance Management is most compared with DX Spectrum, Zabbix and OmniPeek, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics and Nagios XI. See our DX Performance Management vs. SCOM report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network 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.
