We performed a comparison between Cisco Intersight and Pandora FMS 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 tool helps to manage Cisco servers."
"Intersight can validate our environment."
"We enjoy having an inside view of all the data centers and all the EdgeX nodes within a single portal rather than going into the EdgeX connections one by one."
"Scalable portfolio of services for remote device management, with good cloud integration. It's also easy to set up."
"Cisco Intersight has valuable features for workflow automation and inventory administration."
"Our organization uses Cisco Intersight since it helps manage our physical infrastructure."
"Provides an overall view using a single portal."
"What I like most about Cisco Intersight is its manageability."
"You can configure several types of architecture for high availability or load balancing."
"This solution has screens that are easy to understand and provide a wealth of information."
"The most valuable feature is that it is an all-in-one monitoring system."
"The official forum is active enough to answer most of the high-end technical questions that you may have."
"I like this solution a lot because it has a very large Hispanic community and the platform looks very friendly."
"The solution is so lightweight that with only 4GB of ram, it allows keeping track of up to two hundred agents from a single console."
"It allows me to quickly see the status of all of my printers, switches, computers, and virtual machines to determine if any system has fallen."
"It provides us with proactive monitoring and is very easy to configure and maintain."
"The product could be easy to use."
"When new features are added, the service becomes full of bugs."
"In the future, the solution needs to plan on an extension to cover a broader range of objects since, at present, there are some Cisco devices within the range of Intersight UCS that it can't manage."
"An area for improvement in Cisco Intersight is automation. It needs more automation capabilities. Apart from enhanced automation, I want Cisco Intersight to integrate with third-party monitoring tools in its next release."
"Cisco Intersight needs some improvement in terms of stability. Hybrid cloud management and proper hyperscaler tie-up are other areas for improvement."
"It's a very complex solution."
"The usability must be better."
"The unique problem with Cisco Intersight is that it's not supporting some players."
"The price for Pandora FMS is expensive."
"Pandora FMS is relatively new, and the interface with the older version crashes at times. We have several different operating systems, such as Linux and Windows, and Pandora does not run as well in these."
"It would be useful if Pandora FMS included an ISO image (or «software appliance») for each big company that leases virtual private machines (VPS), just like in AWS."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"We would like the real-time monitoring of an interface to be improved within this solution."
"Their support is good, but it is just online communication. It would be great to be able to just call someone and talk to them instead of always writing. It works well for me because I am a decent communicator in email, but some people might find it difficult to describe in a written fashion and communicate with them that way. There is a learning curve to the interface, but once you get used to it, it is actually very powerful. They have a lot of options, but people struggle with the interface. They've improved it though, and it is getting better. They need to keep improving the learning curve to help buy-in. I'm the guy that manages it, so I'm comfortable with it. They can refine the upgrade agents to be easier. They can also do more refinement in end-user usability because not everyone is strong technically, and people who aren't strong technically might be averse to the product, even though it has come a long way. It has a complete GUI and everything."
"Improvements are needed for server and network discovery, including service-based discovery."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
Cisco Intersight is ranked 26th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 10 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 25th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews. Cisco Intersight is rated 7.8, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Intersight writes "Scalable and easy to set up portfolio of services; good for remote device management and other functions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". Cisco Intersight is most compared with Cisco UCS Manager, HPE OneView, IBM Turbonomic, Cisco UCS Director and VMware Aria Automation, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wazuh, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our Cisco Intersight vs. Pandora FMS 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.
