We performed a comparison between DX Unified Infrastructure Management and ManageEngine OpManager 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."
"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."
"It provides a comprehensive monitoring solution for our open systems."
"Latest version of tool comes integrated with Jaspersoft reporting solution, giving excellent reports."
"Monitoring infrastructure and business applications are the most valuable features."
"Having all of our information within one tool set; our alerts, our monitors, and the things that our operations team needs to function."
"It is very scalable."
"MultiWAN and Balance service"
"Easy admin functionality. You can quickly do all the admin functionality without reducing cycles."
"The dashboard, versatility and larger horizon are valuable."
"The integration with the firewall monitoring, the security monitoring, is great."
"The product provides intensive reports."
"I like being able to push configurations to multiple devices. If you have the same configurations for all the branches, it's easier to use ManageEngine OpManager and push configurations at once rather than individually pushing them to each device."
"You can put all of your work on there, they'll send you an email or send you a text. That functionality as a network engineer is the one I like the most. I do like the fact that we can schedule reports. That works too because that's a lot fewer spreadsheets that I have to create."
"We don't have to keep an eye on it; it has a good automation option, which keeps us informed. It gives very less false positives. Overall, a really great product."
"The solution is scalable."
"We use the solution to monitor links. It also helps us to track servers and monitor logs."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"A useful feature to have would be automatic configuration per standard by new robots that check in for any particular customer."
"The only challenge that I have with this solution is the reporting part. The users are not really comfortable with the kind of reports they are getting. Sometimes, they want to see reports in their own format. Customizing those reports with Jasper is not very easy. It could be because of the knowledge gap. If you have the knowledge of how Jasper can be configured to suit customer requirements in terms of reporting, it is good. There was a time a customer complained about one issue related to Netflow analysis. Broadcom has a separate model for that, but the customer wanted everything bundled together. It could also have IP management so that I am able to see or analyze IPs so that the IPs that are already in use don't get assigned."
"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."
"How we can get more native information from CA's solutions."
"Currently lacks a mobile application which would be helpful."
"I would like to see auditability. We've built our own audit functionality to ensure that every CI has the desired model configuration applied to it. And we run that on a daily basis. If that became part of the product, I think it might be a little bit less intensive in terms of resource, because we're doing it with scripts."
"We would like to see automatic network topology."
"The licensing for this solution is not straightforward and should be improved."
"With regard to configurations, however, it would be nice to have more documentation on SNMP configurations. For example, if I want to add a new vendor, it would be great if ManageEngine provided the requirements for that vendor, such as the commands needed."
"Real user and UI monitoring are not practical."
"You cannot resolve 100 percent of the issues yourself. You would need to reach out to the support. It needs to be cheaper."
"What I'd like ManageEngine OpManager to improve on is artificial intelligence. In particular, the machine learning feature should be integrated with the sensor flow. Doing this will give leverage, especially when you look at other products such as the Cisco DNA Center. When a switch goes down, I should be able to build on the correlation of other physical devices it's connected to so that I can integrate that with my CA CMDB. The ManageEngine OpManager team needs to draw a long-term roadmap where that feature becomes an integral part of the solution because right now, machine learning in ManageEngine OpManager is a long process. The solution doesn't have MLS search and I want to see ML being developed and applied for CA CMDB to greatly reduce the burden of tying everything. For example, if I have a data center switch that goes down now, I should know what server it's connected to, and when that switch goes down at twenty-four ports, I would get twenty-four alerts for different devices plugged in. I should be able to make a correlation that the major problem lies in the switch and not with the twenty-four elements connected to that switch. That is where machine learning should come into play and the ManageEngine OpManager AI should indicate "This is where the root of your problem is." It could be difficult, but this is a feature that should be improved or added to the solution."
"The initial setup is a bit complicated. It needs a technician who is very aware of the flow and how to officially set up the flow chart, etc."
"The dashboard has some limitations and should be more user-friendly."
"OpManager is slow but that just might be the server we have it on. I don't think that's the problem but I don't do the server. But it is slow. When you're interacting with it, it could be more nimble and could be faster."
More DX Unified Infrastructure Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
DX Unified Infrastructure Management is ranked 38th in Network Monitoring Software with 120 reviews while ManageEngine OpManager is ranked 15th in Network Monitoring Software with 44 reviews. DX Unified Infrastructure Management is rated 8.2, while ManageEngine OpManager is rated 8.0. 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 ManageEngine OpManager writes "Helps us monitor all the infrastructure in our company but UI monitoring is not practical". DX Unified Infrastructure Management is most compared with DX SaaS, DX Spectrum, SCOM, Nagios XI and Zabbix, whereas ManageEngine OpManager is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, SCOM and LogicMonitor. See our DX Unified Infrastructure Management vs. ManageEngine OpManager 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.