We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) 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."It is more robust than other solutions. So, the stability is good."
"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."
"The hardware is very powerful and it is a stable solution."
"We can configure the Cisco UCS Manager, the profiles and interactions with the resource we manage."
"Cisco UCS Manager is overall a good package because it gives a GUI interface and a CLI."
"The reporting functionality will give you any report you want."
"The most valuable features are flexibility and management."
"It also gives us the closest thing to real-time insight into network performance that we have, with just a 10-second delay. It's very important for us to know the health of the infrastructure very quickly."
"The comprehensiveness of this solution's collection of network performance and flow data is one of the basics in the field for what it does. It meets all of our needs. So for all those areas, for the most straightforward collection capabilities, right up to NetFlow and even telemetry, it meets all those demands. Not only just basic or fundamental SNMP collection capability, but the product also supports what we need for the future with telemetry streaming. So it's very comprehensive."
"Flexible architecture: You can extend the system and its capacity by attaching another cluster pair."
"With this tool it is interesting to show the info to the client and explain where the traffic is."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is the scale-up and scale-down. The scale-up is an operation where the CPU boosts-up and then the memory will boost-up. That works awesomely."
"SevOne provides support for all universal connectors. They internally work with other data sources to get features implemented. We have an SD-WAN implementation and use other app data to monitor performance. If you pull that data into one centralized location, that is very useful for management."
"The automation feature is good because if your CMDB is OK and it is already in sync, then the automation part is good to go."
"One of the most valuable features is the graphs, which you can build instantly. I have used some open-source platforms in the past, but they are not as good. With SevOne, the sampling in the graph can be every few seconds, not just every few minutes, and that's really helpful. It's really fast."
"There is room for improvement in the software part of Cisco UCS Manager. It should be more user-friendly, especially when creating policies."
"Upgrading the firmware is a difficult procedure."
"The interface and the way it is constructed is very complex. They should work to simplify it. It's quite difficult for somebody who doesn't know the product very well. Users should be able to get proficient with it faster. There's definitely room for improvement there."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"The solution's pricing is high and could be reduced."
"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."
"The pricing can be better."
"There are some tweaks and enhancements that I've already requested. One is to be able to make changes per device rather than as a global setting. That has to do with naming. It's minor."
"In terms of having a complete view of our network performance, I would rate it a nine out of 10. The reason for not giving it a 10 is that there is no packet capture associated with SevOne, but we do have other tools in place to do that."
"The tool needs improvement in non-Cisco SD-WAN."
"User-friendly, multi-tenancy."
"The user management features need to be improved. It would be nice if we had more granular control, or layers of control, out of the box."
"We previously have had discussions on some reporting enhancements. So, we raised a feature request, which was delivered from SevOne."
"High-frequency polling is data-intensive because you're pulling more. If SevOne could figure out a way to manage the impact of high-frequency polling on the system, that would be very popular."
"The reports are easy to configure but they are a bit outdated in terms of appearance and visualization."
More IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 30th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is ranked 34th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 52 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Stable and resilient, but slightly more complicated to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) writes "We can get a new vendor certified and monitored in our system significantly faster than before". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, HPE OneView, Zabbix and Datadog, whereas IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is most compared with Instana Infrastructure Monitoring, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Splunk Enterprise Security and NETSCOUT nGeniusONE. See our Cisco UCS Manager vs. IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) 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.
