We performed a comparison between Pandora FMS and vRealize Network Insight 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."
"The solution has good dashboards and graphics."
"You can configure several types of architecture for high availability or load balancing."
"This product has allowed us to identify and correct certain issues that were affecting our solution."
"What I value most about Pandora FMS is the simplicity of working with it."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"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."
"The most valuable features are auto-discovery and automatic detection of the network topology and network monitoring."
"The most valuable feature is that it is an all-in-one monitoring system."
"The most valuable feature for me is the different views that you can get when selecting an application or a VLAN. It shows you the traffic flows. It gives you a visual representation of something that, in text, just may not make as much sense."
"I find it user-friendly and intuitive. With the GUI interface that we do use on a regular basis, it's easy to navigate, it's easy to see, easy to query. We get reports. It's easy to use."
"compare-to-competition; I would recommend the product. I don't think there is any other product like this on the market right now."
"It's user-friendly. It's similar to the GUI that most VMware products are moving to, and the consistency across those makes it easy to switch from one product to another. Also, the search bar at the top is plain text and it helps you, it guides you along with your search query, so that helps. The first day you're in there you can start building actual queries."
"It allows us to see how the network devices function as well as to see network glitches or fluctuations or dropping of packets."
"We can see everything going on in NSX and get a good picture of our environment."
"The best feature of this application is its ability to capture everything within the same application, as well as capture all the traffic."
"It allows you to see traffic that you couldn't otherwise see, which is traffic within your Layer 3-bounded network, meaning east-west traffic. It's hard to get that any other way."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I would like to have a dashboard with all assets displayed, with a quick hover-over status."
"I sincerely believe that Pandora needs new ideas for functionality closer to advanced device security monitoring."
"This solution requires proper training to get 100% out of it."
"A nice feature in the next release would be an automation module to run workflow actions."
"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."
"In the future, we may have double the number of devices, and we do not want to have any issues with performance in the data display."
"I find that this software is resource heavy, and demands a lot of processing capacity."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"There are some random glitches in the Web UI, but they are usually pretty cosmetic in nature. I don't really seem to use any browser other than Chrome with it. I also get some weird errors from time to time on the hardware NetFlow Collectors, where it doesn't sync data."
"The product is slightly complex use, while still being user-friendly. It could use more training modules, as it is not a straightforward product."
"The only reason I would not give it a nine or a 10 is for cost reasons. It seems to be one of those things that really belongs as part of the product inherently and not as an add-on. That would be my only concern."
"There is room for improvement when it comes to pricing because we pay here in Brazil, and all the costs are based on the dollar."
"The solution can be improved by making it more compatible with other brands, allowing for better integration."
"The solution is very much viewer centric and it would be nice if it would transcend just the virtual infrastructure."
"I'd like to see better support for being able to search the hardware NetFlow data. It ingests fairly well, but you can't tell, in a lot of cases, what source the data came from. I'd like to see more support for picking specific sources. That way you could really make a compelling use case. There are also some difficulties where it can't exactly trace the path between source and destination but if you hit the reverse flow on the same search it shows the entire path."
"The UI, even though once you get to know it, it's easier, still it's hard to figure out by yourself. You have to go read, watch videos. It has a lot of data on it. So that is an issue."
Pandora FMS is ranked 29th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews while vRealize Network Insight is ranked 23rd in Network Monitoring Software with 44 reviews. Pandora FMS is rated 9.2, while vRealize Network Insight is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of vRealize Network Insight writes "Provides deep analytical insights and makes migrations efficient with dependency mapping". Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wazuh, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM, whereas vRealize Network Insight is most compared with ThousandEyes, NETSCOUT vSTREAM, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, Zabbix and AppNeta by Broadcom. See our Pandora FMS vs. vRealize Network Insight report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software 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.
