We performed a comparison between Checkmk and Cisco UCS Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of Checkmk are its resource monitoring, infra monitoring, and log factor configuration."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it has a lot of different pieces, and they all work together...It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
"I can quickly manage the provisioned servers."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"The hardware is very powerful and it is a stable solution."
"The reporting functionality will give you any report you want."
"It is more robust than other solutions. So, the stability is good."
"We can configure the Cisco UCS Manager, the profiles and interactions with the resource we manage."
"I can deploy something in my 50-odd servers all in one go, in parallel, whereas if I was to do that individually, it could be a nightmare."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"If an alert is generated for a specific pattern in the log, and if Checkmk catches that log, it will stay there even after the alert is resolved."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"Sometimes we receive alerts, and it can become annoying when you acknowledge an alert. It is very clunky when you acknowledge the alert. The process is not very intuitive, and there are instances where it feels a bit cumbersome to acknowledge an alert."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"I want to be able to schedule multiple sequential updates in one go."
"The solution's pricing is high and could be reduced."
"There is room for improvement in the software part of Cisco UCS Manager. It should be more user-friendly, especially when creating policies."
"Cisco UCS Manager is not a scalable solution because once you have 160 blades, it cannot be expanded more."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"The automation within the solution needs to be simplified."
"Getting a CLI report on routers, switches, or any other CLI configuration device is difficult."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security."
Checkmk is ranked 21st in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 6 reviews while Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 30th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews. Checkmk is rated 8.6, while Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Checkmk writes "A reasonably priced tool for system and application monitoring". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". Checkmk is most compared with Zabbix, Icinga, Netdata, Centreon and Nagios XI, whereas Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, HPE OneView, Zabbix and Datadog. See our Checkmk vs. Cisco UCS Manager report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
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.
