We compared IBM SevOne Network Performance Monitoring and Pandora FMS across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: IBM SevOne NPM users like its modular design, performance management reports, and real-time insights. The solution is also praised for its SNMP data collection and integration with ITSM solutions. Pandora FMS is highly regarded for its straightforward management process, effective dashboards, and efficient network monitoring capabilities.
Room for Improvement: IBM SevOne NPM could benefit from better SD-WAN capabilities and live maps. Users say the solution could also improve its AI/ML modules and provide more actionable insights. Users say Pandora FMS could make its dashboards more customizable and improve its integration with other systems. Many also said they would like Pandora to add APIs for integration and offer better out-of-the-box analytics.
Service and Support: Customers reported generally positive experiences with IBM customer service, praising the support team's availability and responsiveness. However, some users said they would rather not have to rely so heavily on support for upgrades. Pandora FMS support received high praise for their expertise, kindness, and fast response time.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for IBM SevOne NPM is described as quick and uncomplicated, although some users may require extra configuration. Most users found Pandora FMS’s initial setup to be relatively easy.
Pricing: IBM SevOne NPM is seen as costly, particularly for smaller businesses. Pandora FMS is considered reasonably priced, and the total cost depends on the environment.
ROI: IBM SevOne NPM offers features such as device maintenance and out-of-the-box reports that contribute to its value. Pandora FMS has also demonstrated advantages in terms of return on investment.
Comparison Results: IBM SevOne NPM stands out for its real-time insights, integration capabilities, straightforward setup, and top-notch customer service. Users say the solution could improve its AI/ML capabilities and lower its pricing to be more affordable for smaller businesses. Users like Pandora FMS’s management and monitoring capabilities as well as its dashboards, but the solution has been criticized for its compatibility issues, limited customization options, and slower performance.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"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."
"Data Insight reporting tool is the most valuable feature. They came up with it a couple of years ago. The most pleasing factor is the dark theme. You don't have a white background. It has templates that you can create for all kinds of reports that you can hit on the fly. It's much better printing of the reports. If you want to send PDFs to people, the reports are actually decent. Whereas for years, the old architecture of the PDFs was rubbish and even our customers said, "We have to manipulate your PDFs because they all have bad margin breaks. SevOne fixed that a couple of years ago with the new Data Insight. It's fantastic."
"One of the solution's biggest strengths is its capacity management performance, with out-of-the-box reports through NMS, as well as its ability to collect NetFlow-related data from devices. The collection of network performance and flow data is important because we have many critical business applications."
"Its ability to monitor practically any type of network device via SNMP is most valuable. This is the main functionality that we're using. If a network device exposes a metric, such as interface utilization, SevOne will monitor it for us."
"The SMP and the xStats, which is for flat file integration, are both useful for integrating the various metrics that the device provides to monitor the performance of those systems."
"It's given us the ability to create various real-time network performance reports and distribute them to any colleague who can access these reports immediately."
"With this tool it is interesting to show the info to the client and explain where the traffic is."
"Scalability. I have never had to worry about how to handle really big environments."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"The solution has good dashboards and graphics."
"It provides us with proactive monitoring and is very easy to configure and maintain."
"The administration of the console is very easy. I like that Pandora FMS is interactive and easy to manage."
"It is easy to create your own custom modules if you just know a little bit of scripting. If you have unique requirements, you can just make your own modules. You can even grab checks from other vendors. There are open-source checks for various things such as SMTP, etc. There is a long list of different ones from Nagios. You can just use them, and within seconds, you get yourself a check that is monitoring whatever you need. It is really flexible. I guess that's why they call it Pandora Flexible Monitoring System (FMS). It is reliable. It does the job, and it alerts. It is also surprisingly feature-rich. Our network guy just recently asked about a particular protocol to monitor the bandwidth on the network, which is not a common protocol. When I looked it up, and I found that they cover it. It is very mature for a not-so-known product."
"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."
"This solution has screens that are easy to understand and provide a wealth of information."
"The monitoring system within this solution is very good. It is easy to use and navigate, and makes issue alarms easily viewable."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"User-friendly, multi-tenancy."
"Would benefit with the addition of AI modules for proactive data insights."
"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."
"I would like to see live maps as an added feature. Also, build modules on AI and EML to provide better data insights that would proactively tell us what we should be looking after."
"The reporting of NMS is good, but it could be better."
"NMS has several areas for improvement. It should be more user-friendly inside of NMS for some of the functionality in there. It's been getting better the last version or two, but the there have been bugs in there whenever I've gone to new versions."
"The GUI: both the dashboard/user view and the admin tool."
"One area that requires a little bit of improvement is the topology of visualization and being able to map out connections, end-to-end. It's able to do that, but it's not as impressive as we would like it to be. We would like to understand the different interface types and the connection points better, through the visualization. Heatmaps also need further development."
"I would like to have a dashboard with all assets displayed, with a quick hover-over status."
"It would be helpful to include the generation of reports for times that the network was out of service."
"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."
"Third-party integration should be improved for some commonly used products."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"I find that this software is resource heavy, and demands a lot of processing capacity."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"I would like for the solution to be faster and have a better tolerance between parallel servers for Pandora and Pest Control."
More IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is ranked 41st in Network Monitoring Software with 52 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 29th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews. IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is rated 8.6, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is most compared with LogicMonitor, Instana Infrastructure Monitoring, SolarWinds NPM, Splunk Enterprise Security and SolarWinds Network Device Monitor, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wazuh, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) 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.
