We performed a comparison between NetCrunch and Pandora FMS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"Reporting on NetCrunch is pretty good. It's very similar to SolarWinds. It's just a different interface. The majority of everything there was beneficial."
"Pandora's architecture is interesting. It's open so you can easily extend and enhance it. It's simpler to customize Pandora compared to other solutions. It's also scalable enough to support large environments."
"The solution has good dashboards and graphics."
"Pandora FMS provides us with a general report (graphical) about all of the connected devices, which helps with planning new stations and tracking them."
"You can configure several types of architecture for high availability or load balancing."
"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."
"The most valuable features are auto-discovery and automatic detection of the network topology and network monitoring."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"I like this solution a lot because it has a very large Hispanic community and the platform looks very friendly."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I didn't care for the role-based, permission-based options, which were not the best."
"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."
"It would be helpful to include the generation of reports for times that the network was out of service."
"The price for Pandora FMS is expensive."
"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."
"An update to the Android app would be appreciated."
"Pandora could deliver better analytics out of the box. You can work around these limitations with the help of other tools like Grafana. The shortcomings are mostly on the graphical side. The built-in report generators are a bit limited in some areas."
"The product lacks APIs for integration with other systems."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
Earn 20 points
NetCrunch is ranked 77th in Network Monitoring Software while Pandora FMS is ranked 28th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews. NetCrunch is rated 8.0, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of NetCrunch writes "A network monitoring platform with a useful reporting feature, but permission-based options could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". NetCrunch is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor and Fortinet FortiSIEM, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our NetCrunch vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Server Monitoring vendors, and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
