Anonymous UserTechincal Support at a tech services company
Anonymous UserNetwork Engineer at a healthcare company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Auvik automatically updates network topology. Since it automatically updates the topology, we proactively know what is happening in a country or our branch offices. It also alerts us if there is a topology change, e.g., if it discovers anything new in that country. So, it has reduced the number of failures in our operations. We went from being reactive to proactive. So, we are no longer reacting to what is happening and others are doing. This has saved us about two to three hours a day. We used to spend two to three hours every morning checking the firewall and router logs for malicious behavior."
"I have found the cross analysis feature to be the most valuable."
"We were able to standardize the internal processes across all internal departments, resulting in almost an elimination of non-standard process flows through our organization."
"The most valuable feature is the auto-discovery, which is nice because you don't have to do anything to add a new component."
"This product provides good visibility into applications at the backend."
"What I like best is the configuration management functionality."
"The most valuable feature is automatic discovery."
"The fault management is perfect."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to put health checks in place not only for the infrastructure but for some of the services that are on top of the infrastructure."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the ability to track what a device is doing and to go back historically. It is also able to go down to, and identify, very low levels of traffic."
"The ability to view the status of the top-10 at a glance is helpful. We immediately know which link is over-utilized or heavily used... and it's all in real-time."
"It's agnostic as far as what your network gear is. As long as it supports an sFlow, JFlow, NetFlow, some kind of flow monitoring, Plixer will support it very well."
"There are other tools out there that will do what Scrutinizer does. But what I have found with Scrutinizer is that it does it very quickly. I've taken 25 million individual data fragments from the different sensors, and it has graphed that and mapped it and presented a picture within 30 seconds. It has a very efficient database algorithm that I am really impressed with."
"The reporting and generating troubleshooting reports would be the best feature; our host-to-host conversation reporting."
"As a network engineer, the ability to identify what traffic on the link is consuming all the bandwidth at any given time, and provide immediate feedback to the business, is the most valuable feature."
"We have had many requests to understand in the network which devices are connected to others. Most people don't have this information or are able to establish a map of data flow everywhere around the network. Scrutinizer can really help with this. We are using it to understand who is talking to what, how, and which protocols can help us to improve security and analyze flow."
"The solution helps to enrich the data context of our network traffic. It allows me to see what applications are most in use on a slightly historical basis, going back a day or week at tops. It allows me to tune QoS or traffic shaping around what's being used. It saves me from having to unnecessarily upgrade, if I don't need to."
"They need to improve the reporting system. They still don't have a proper reporting system in Auvik. They have built a dashboard in Power BI using APIs, but they should build some sort of report within Auvik itself. If Auvik fixes the reporting or comes up with a good reporting module, it will change the game."
"For us, the implementation was quite complex but it's because of the large number of different environments we're dealing with."
"We want to make our own choice for the AIOps solution and do not want to be forced to use the Broadcom OI solution by default."
"The interface is not nice and needs to be improved."
"There should be a facility to integrate with other monitoring applications that are currently running in the environment."
"Huawei devices are not properly supported, and there are incompatibility issues related to certain protocols."
"Event correlation only works on one server, rather than on all of the servers in the same cluster environment."
"I think the management or configuration of devices needs some improvement."
"Integration with some other tools, and integration with some Network Packet Broker, need some improvement."
"The reporting structure, the front-end GUI, also needs some work. It needs some getting used to. It works fairly well, but it's a technical tool rather than a user tool. You have to understand the structure of the databases before you can really use it."
"The solution creates a visual map of a particular location and how the network flows. You need to spend time to generate all those maps. If they could figure out a way to reduce the time needed to generate the maps, that would be great."
"They're working on the security areas, so it can provide more insight. What they have is still pretty much IP-concentric. If they were to make it IP and URL, they'd be a little bit ahead on that."
"Knowing that they're coming out with a new user interface, that is an area where there is room for improvement. There are so many variables. They should limit the variables in the user interface and create some classes, like "simple," "novice," and "expert" to narrow down the variables within it."
"There is room for improvement around the data that they have on the website about solutions... they should have more templated solutions on their website. Going out and identifying how to do RTP performance with a Cisco router, or how to do application response times in an Arrista data center deployment was where most of the work was... They should spend some more time documenting solutions and putting together white papers."
"For updating the Scrutinizer platform, when we have the actual data, it never happens in one day. Every time we have the data, we are obliged to install a new server in order to integrate the old data, and every time it has a problem. Most of the time, we were obliged to scrap all the data because we couldn't transfer it to the new server. So, it would be very good if they could improve this part."
"The visual acuity of how it presents data can sometimes be confusing. It takes a bit for people to spin up how to look at the graphs."
"It would be useful if there was a way to back up the configuration information. E.g., if you wanted to deploy a new instance or disaster recovery, you could quite easily deploy and restore the config, as opposed to having to restore all the NetFlow data. If there was just a button that said "backup config information", that would be good."
"Compared to other products, Auvik's pricing is more feasible since you get all its features. You pay for licenses on a per network device basis. It monitors hypervisors, but does not bill for that. There are no additional costs, which is something that I like."
"In general, the license cost will be about 30% of the total TCO for this tool (hardware/support team, OS costs, and OS management)."
"The product, support, and maintenance are all expensive, which is another reason that we are switching to another solution."
"The price is very high."
"Compared to some of the other tools we have, it's incredibly reasonably priced."
"Our entire solution, amortized over five years, is in the vicinity of $40,000 to $50,000 a year."
"We pay our one-off cost for the licenses, per device, in blocks of 50. And then we pay an annual maintenance fee of about $15,000 Australian, which is, at this point in time, about $9,000 US, for those 250 devices. The upfront costs for the 250-license use, were about $50,000 Australian, which is about $32,000 US."
"The license is per device. We have 50 devices."
"We just renewed. The pricing is 5,000 euro per year. This is the final price. All tax (20 percent) is included."
"We have increased the license over time. We have added more licenses as the network has grown."
"There is a recurring maintenance fee after the initial purchase or if we want the license upgrade."
"There are no extra costs. It's about $8,000 a year. The bang for the buck (cost) is definitely a plus."
Earn 20 points
Auvik is cloud-based software that simplifies and automates network monitoring and management to give you complete network visibility and control.
Designed to deploy in minutes, you’ll resolve problems faster than ever with real-time network mapping and inventory, powerful troubleshooting features, deep network traffic insights, automated config backups and restore, and more. https://www.auvik.com/get-free-trial
The Scrutinizer incident response system leverages network traffic analytics to provide active monitoring, visualization, and reporting of network and security incidents. The system quickly delivers the rich forensic data needed by IT professionals to support fast and efficient incident response.
DX Spectrum is ranked 19th in Network Monitoring Software with 9 reviews while Plixer Scrutinizer is ranked 9th in Network Monitoring Software with 11 reviews. DX Spectrum is rated 7.8, while Plixer Scrutinizer is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of DX Spectrum writes "Good monitoring, alerting capabilities, and improved visibility, but AIOps is restricted to Broadcom". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Plixer Scrutinizer writes "Advanced reporting runs analytics on NetFlow and provides signature-based recognition of problems in the network environment". DX Spectrum is most compared with DX NetOps, SolarWinds NPM, Splunk, Zabbix and DX Performance Management, whereas Plixer Scrutinizer is most compared with SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer, Cisco Stealthwatch, PRTG Network Monitor, Darktrace and Flowmon Solution. See our DX Spectrum vs. Plixer Scrutinizer report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.