We performed a comparison between CodeSonar and SonarQube based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."
"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."
"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."
"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."
"It has been able to scale."
"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."
"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."
"We advise all of our developers to have this solution in place."
"There's plenty of documentation available to users."
"I like that it covers most programming languages for source code review."
"The solution offers a very good community edition."
"Using SonarQube has helped us to identify areas of technical debt to work on, resulting in better code, fewer vulnerabilities, and fewer bugs."
"The solution's user interface is very user-friendly."
"SonarQube has a lot of value, it reviews the basic coding standards and security vulnerabilities of code that help to reduce issues."
"It provides the security that is required from a solution for financial businesses."
"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."
"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."
"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."
"It was expensive."
"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."
"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."
"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."
"You may need to purchase add-ons to get the useability you desire."
"If the product could assist us with fixing issues by giving us more pointers then it would help to resolve more of the warnings without such a commitment in terms of time."
"It would be better if SonarQube provided a good UI for external configuration."
"The learning curve can be fairly steep at first, but then, it's not an entry-level type of application. It's not like an introduction to C programming. You should know not just C programming and how to make projects but also how to apply its findings to the bigger picture. I've had users who said that they wish it was easier to understand how to configure, but I don't know if that's doable because what it's doing is a very complicated thing. I don't know if it is possible to make a complicated thing trivially simple."
"Their dashboarding is very limited. They can improve their dashboards for multiple areas, such as security review, maintainability, etc. They have all this information, so they should publish all this information on the dashboard so that the users can view the summary and then analyze it further. This is something that I would like to see in the next version."
"A little bit more emphasis on security and a bit more security scanning features would be nice."
"We have tens of millions of code to be analyzed and processed. There can be some performance degradation if we are applying Sonar Link to large code or code that is complex. When the code had to be analyzed is when we ran into the main issues. There were several routines involved to solve those performance issues but this process should be improved."
"A better design of the interface and add some new rules."
CodeSonar is ranked 22nd in Application Security Tools with 7 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 108 reviews. CodeSonar is rated 8.2, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CodeSonar writes "Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". CodeSonar is most compared with Coverity, Klocwork, Polyspace Code Prover, Semgrep Code and Fortify Static Code Analyzer, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and HCL AppScan. See our CodeSonar vs. SonarQube report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
