We compared Zabbix and ScienceLogic across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Zabbix is highly regarded for its user-friendly interface, scalability, and reliable performance. It provides customizable dashboards, trigger dependencies, SNMP monitoring, and problem tracking. ScienceLogic is highly regarded for its serverless and agent connectivity, versatile graphs and personalized dashboards, AIOps and event management capabilities, as well as its AI and machine learning features.
Room for Improvement: Zabbix could reduce false positives and improve integration, cloud monitoring, and reporting. ScienceLogic can enhance its documentation, Power Packs, notification features, and automation options.
Service and Support: Users had mixed opinions about Zabbix customer service. Some found it helpful, while others feel it needs improvement. Customers generally rely on online documentation and community forums for assistance. ScienceLogic's customer service is generally considered responsive and professional. However, a few users reported delayed response times and support engineers with limited expertise.
Ease of Deployment: The complexity of Zabbix's initial setup varies, and it may require an experienced group of administrators and engineers. ScienceLogic's initial setup is described as simple and efficient. The deployment process can be completed within a few hours or a couple of weeks.
Pricing: Zabbix is a free, open-source solution, but users can purchase support services and additional features. Opinions on the price of ScienceLogic were mixed. Pricing is determined by the number of network devices or endpoints, and there are no hidden charges.
ROI: Users say that Zabbix provides a cost-effective solution. ScienceLogic improves troubleshooting and minimizes network outages.
Comparison Results: Zabbix is a highly customizable open-source solution with a wide range of monitoring capabilities, including the ability to monitor virtual machines and databases. However, Zabbix’s setup can be complex and may require technical expertise. ScienceLogic is praised for its serverless and agent connectivity, effortless setup, and customized dashboards. However, it lacks detailed documentation and automation options.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"The best feature is the highly flexible graphs."
"They've already added extra features, such as noise-canceling and facial recognition, which is great."
"The flexibility of this solution is amazing."
"It has an intuitive UI with beautiful graphs and customizable maps."
"I have found that the reporting feature in Zabbix is most valuable. Additionally, the solution has given us bandwidth options, we are able to see where problems are. For example, we noticed a problem that occurred because of a bad interface going in the wireless VLAN."
"We are able to do problem determination on runaway processes."
"The most valuable feature is network traffic monitoring."
"The level of discovery-based configuration that lets us auto-configure the monitoring for various systems is a valuable feature."
"It's a flexible solution."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"I want Zabbix to improve the UX/UI. Zabbix doesn't use a JavaScript chart for images, and I want them to improve this."
"Zabbix isn't very good at automation just yet."
"Sometimes, the documentation is a little bit written in Estonia – a country in Europe. The language barrier and translation to English can sometimes make it difficult to understand what they're trying to get at. It's just a language thing."
"The APM monitoring has room for improvement, although I hear that the new 5.2 version has some improvements in that area, and I'd like to give that a go. I would like to see a few more templates out there for different styles of monitoring. I use the Grafana interface for reporting. I would also like it to have an out-of-the-box ability to email reports. You can create reports, but to be able to email those reports would be really helpful. I've got users who are not interested in logging in and generating a report. They want it all pre-canned and sent to an email address. It would also be really handy if we could pin certain reports up onto platforms such as Teams or SharePoint. A GUI for the proxy server would be cool to have for debugging purposes and for the support teams to have a look at, but I don't know whether that's really feasible to do. I get enough from the log files themselves."
"There is a bit of a learning curve during installation."
"An area for improvement would be the ease of doing aggregation from the value or different devices."
"The documentation gets a bit messy between versions and is not too detailed, which is a bit painful for first-timers, especially when they run into issues."
"In the next release, I'm hoping for features targeted towards larger users with more customizable options. Despite this, I think pre-canned reports that can be used straight out of the box would be beneficial rather than having to configure each report individually. Additionally, a deeper dive into software configurations on the machines would be useful, although I understand there may be challenges in implementing this due to scripting requirements. More documentation would also be appreciated."
ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in Cloud Monitoring Software with 42 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 2nd in Cloud Monitoring Software with 98 reviews. ScienceLogic is rated 8.6, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, SolarWinds NPM, Nagios XI and Nagios Core. See our ScienceLogic vs. Zabbix report.
See our list of best Server Monitoring vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Cloud 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.
