We performed a comparison between Avantra 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 feature of Avantra is automation. The reduction of manual work and having them automated is one of the top reasons why I would use it."
"You can customize alerts based on need."
"It's very easy to manage and use."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"Cisco UCS has different layers of security, and you can do multiple installations of your LIAMs on top of the server and Blade. You can install VMware, Windows Server, Hyper-V, etc."
"The most valuable features are flexibility and management."
"Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
"The hardware is very powerful and it is a stable solution."
"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."
"Cisco UCS Manager is overall a good package because it gives a GUI interface and a CLI."
"It is more robust than other solutions. So, the stability is good."
"The dashboard needs to improve."
"We are currently exploring automation options for various areas, and Avantra should consider implementing automation for change request management, an area they have not yet ventured into. While Avantra is currently excelling in monitoring and system refreshes, there is scope for improvement in automating change request management. In addition to primarily focusing on SAP, Avantra currently performs kernel patches which are core SAP patches. However, exploring more into OS patching could be another potential area for Avantra to expand its automation capabilities."
"The machine-learning is lacking and should be improved."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"Its user interface can be improved. It can be more user-friendly."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security."
"I found it a bit of a challenge to get training on UCSM. I've been trying to get that for some time now. I feel like I have to figure it out a lot of things myself. For years I've to log calls with support whenever I've got challenges that I cannot resolve. If I had some training or more manuals, I'd be better able to handle more things on my own."
"The pricing can be better."
"Upgrading the firmware is a difficult procedure."
"The integration with other solutions could be better. I think Cisco can only integrate using Intersight. There is a second interface available as a SaaS platform, in the cloud, or on-premise. It's based on the Redfish protocol, which is standard for all the B-series servers in the market. We can integrate other solutions using API."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
Avantra is ranked 44th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 5 reviews while Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 30th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews. Avantra is rated 8.6, while Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Avantra writes "User-friendly, simple to set up and easy to configure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Stable and resilient, but slightly more complicated to deploy". Avantra is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, AppDynamics and OpsRamp, whereas Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, HPE OneView, Zabbix and Datadog. See our Avantra 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.
