We performed a comparison between PRTG Network Monitor and SCOM 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."
"We have asked questions of their technical support and they have a very good response time."
"The network visualization helps us to drill down deeper."
"We can see trends for a lot of different things, such as hard drive space and bandwidth usage. We can see and plan for the future by knowing, "We're sort of at 75% capacity now. In three months time, we know we're going to be up to 90%,so we need to plan ahead for it, getting upgrades booked in place." Since things like this take time and effort, it's handy to see trends into the future of where our company is going."
"It is great for service level agreements and can comply fully with internet monitoring or any interface."
"PRTG is relatively intuitive and fairly straightforward. It has net flow monitoring and that works all right. I would describe it as a decent middle-of-the-road solution."
"It is easy to use and intuitive, which is really important. It does what it says on the box by giving you a visual of the state of what is going on at any one time."
"The solution is scalable."
"The Slack integration is fantastic, and I've actually found it to be very useful recently."
"SCOM has improved our organization by simplifying the monitoring process. The system tells you what the bi-weekly or monthly usage was and that enables us to report this information to the manager. It shows if there was a connectivity issue that needs to be fixed and it's easier to concentrate on what needs to get fixed. System errors, therefore, get fixed faster."
"The solution has improved our overrides and the ability to start services if they're stopped."
"The most valuable feature is the extensibility, as there are really no limits as to what you can do with it."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"We are able to do problem determination on runaway processes."
"It's easy to use."
"It has good graphs of what is going on within the operating system."
"It is a user-friendly product that requires almost no maintenance."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"If PRTG could help me see the bandwidth for each host I have on my network, either for a wireless or a wired network, that would be very helpful."
"PRTG's documentation could be improved."
"PRTG Network Monitor can improve by having better integration with devices."
"The thing that we do struggle with a bit is in the historic data. If I want look over 30 days, because it averages out onto one graph, you can't zoom in and drill down information."
"Other monitoring tools that I have used are easier to use."
"Integration into service management ticketing systems could be better. They should simplify the integration into big service management platforms like ServiceNow, Remedy, and Cherwell. They're really into monitoring, but they don't do any self-resolution. It would be better if the company moved more into the AIOps space so that you could actually kick off some remedies. I know that you can execute some commands from the tool, but you need to develop those all yourself. It would be really handy if they had some auto-remedy scripts that they could develop on top."
"It probably has this already, but if it had a mobile app that would be helpful. For example, on a day like today when I'm out, if I could just fire it up and see green, green, green, green, green or red, that would be good."
"Scalability is the only major sticking point for me. There is a recommended number of sensors, which is around 10,000 and we're double that... The only option we have to scale is to buy another core, which would be a separate, stand-alone instance..."
"The console feature is very poor, and it would be very good for us if this were improved."
"Direct integration with third-party tools, like ticketing systems, is lacking but would be beneficial."
"I would like to see more standard libraries for the market solutions, out of the box, that you don't need to do a lot of work on."
"Non Windows monitoring is fairly weak. Network device monitoring is not reliable."
"Then there is also an issue with capacity and limited space. That is something that needs to be improved."
"They can focus more on cloud monitoring instead of on-premise monitoring. We should be able to monitor cloud-related applications. They can include this feature in the next release. If it is in the cloud, we can have scalability by using Kubernetes. The container is containerized, packaged, and managed using Kubernetes. This feature is not there in SCOM. Going forward, if they can focus on that, it will be great."
"In terms of features that could be improved, I would say the agent integration into the operating system. We are having difficulties integrating Linux into some of the networking devices."
"The solution can be improved by expanding to cloud usage."
PRTG Network Monitor is ranked 5th in Network Monitoring Software with 96 reviews while SCOM is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 77 reviews. PRTG Network Monitor is rated 8.2, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of PRTG Network Monitor writes "It's an all-in-one solution, and net flow is included in the licensing ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". PRTG Network Monitor is most compared with Zabbix, Centreon, Nagios XI, SolarWinds NPM and Datto Remote Monitoring and Management, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics and OpenText Operations Bridge. See our PRTG Network Monitor vs. SCOM 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.
