We performed a comparison between DX Unified Infrastructure Management and LogRhythm NetMon 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."
"It is the foundation for our monitoring solution."
"It is easy to implement."
"It delivers our customers many metrics, so they may make decisions"
"This solution allows us to have an overview of the infrastructure and identify areas where the performance isn't optimal, or where upgrades could be carried out."
"It is very scalable."
"What I like about DX Unified Infrastructure Management is that it's a very good product. The feature I found most valuable in the solution is the MCS feature, which is the automatic deployment of the objects you want to monitor. You can set up a system, for example, if it's a Windows machine and I want to test specific devices on it, I could do that through DX Unified Infrastructure Management. That type of deployment is very good because it means you won't miss any monitoring aspect on any server."
"Another division handed us the opportunity to monitor their solutions as written, and UIM was very useful for that."
"DX UIM is scalable."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"NetMon's best feature is traffic analysis."
"The protocols with which you see the traffic for a particular website that a client has in their environment, for example, are valuable. We can monitor whether the traffic is up to the mark or whether they need to add more bandwidth. Also, we can see if we're able to get real-time environment data as well. The customization dashboard is really good. LogRhythm NetMon has its own in-built dashboards which are helpful in guiding customization."
"Visibility is a valuable feature, the ability to see even if the traffic is not going into the firewall"
"The analytics feature is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the log, which can be analyzed by our SIEM solution."
"It has a very strong artificial intelligence engine."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Within this product there are individual probes, and each of these probes doesn't always necessarily output the same kind of information into our database. So when we try to collect what's called QoS data, from one probe we might get a ton of information, lots of good stuff that we can use in our database, but then from another probe, we might not get so much or we might not be able to pull the things that we want to."
"We have experienced challenges with finding a mechanism to deploy the agents, but it's only on the first deployment so it's not a big issue."
"We would like to see automatic network topology."
"They need to continue to advance the filter capabilities, and provide more input fields."
"I'd also like to see more probes. More probes in the sense that we were coming across devices that we're expected to monitor and manage for which, out of the box, there isn't a nice, clean solution. There are probes that are dedicated for certain devices and certain device types, which is great. But then there are times we come across nuanced products that we have to develop our own solution for. There are probes that exist in there that allow us to make a customized solution, but it takes a lot more time."
"It would be good to implement views showing the aggregated status graphically."
"The dashboards need to be improved."
"There should be wider coverage of storage infrastructure."
"There is an issue with tunneling in relation to how the connectivity is established between the end devices and where NetMon is installed. On the console, I often observe that there's a difference of a few seconds or maybe a minute, and this lag time should not be there."
"The training for this product is not very good and needs to be improved."
"I would like to see better integration with multiple products. Integration is not something that is readily available for most of the products."
"Sometimes it's hard to find the network devices' self-audit logs."
"LogRhythm NetMon's pricing model is an area of concern that should be made a little bit cheaper in comparison to the other players in the market currently."
"Some of the automated tasks we can perform on QRadar cannot be performed on LogRhythm because the solution has limitations."
"Could use a topology diagram which would help get an exact visual."
More DX Unified Infrastructure Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
DX Unified Infrastructure Management is ranked 37th in Network Monitoring Software with 120 reviews while LogRhythm NetMon is ranked 57th in Network Monitoring Software with 9 reviews. DX Unified Infrastructure Management is rated 8.2, while LogRhythm NetMon is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of DX Unified Infrastructure Management writes "Easy to set up, simple to use, and offers great technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of LogRhythm NetMon writes "A stable and scalable tool useful for network behavior analysis, DPA, and network forensic services". DX Unified Infrastructure Management is most compared with DX SaaS, DX Spectrum, SCOM, ManageEngine OpManager and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor, whereas LogRhythm NetMon is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, ObserverLIVE, SCOM and Zabbix. See our DX Unified Infrastructure Management vs. LogRhythm NetMon 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.
