I never tried to scale Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, so I'm unable to comment on its scalability. I'm a single user only.

Since each team uses its repository, the need to scale hasn't arisen. There are around 20 to 30 end users using this solution. 

However, a web browser version would be advantageous, considering current trends towards cloud-based solutions. The desktop version is somewhat limiting.

While we've attempted to use it for integration purposes, such as contract creation, there are challenges, especially with unique hardware integrations. It often proves simpler to use external tools for software development. 

I'm not sure how well this product can scale. We have a lot of models and it seems we have reached our limit. 

Around five executives used the solution actively in my previous company. It is scalable for larger projects.

It is a scalable solution. I have used it for large organisations.

When many users are accessing the system at the same time, Sparx slows down. It can't easily support a large team. I'm a contractor and for my latest contract, there are 30 architects and 20 business analysts.

I find the solution very configurable. I could go in and change the format for export. I brought products into the ArchiMate from EA and the other way around. They seemed to work because they store them as common components.

The scalability is fair. If you are a mega-corporation (like worldwide and hundreds of thousands of configuration items), it boils down to the sizing of the DBserver on which the model is hosted. I've already worked with quite big model repositories and at some point, you might need to partition into different repositories and consolidate whatever you need a unified view on, but if you are willing to treat Sparx EA as the focal tool within a partly self-developed framework of architecture tools you are good to go.

It is scalable. We have a really small team. I've got three licenses that we're using, and it's all on the desktops.

It is a scalable solution, and we currently have three system architects who use it.

We hope to increase usage in the future. We are a consulting company, and if we got a project that required the use of any of the features available in Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, then it would be the tool that we will be using.

Enterprise Architect is a very flexible and scalable tool. It can be set-up different ways to accommodate capacity, volume, and a number of simultaneous modeling users. 

In general, performance and scalability is solid. There are times when communication to the shared repository in AWS would be inconsistent, but I think that was due to the corporate network connection

We have a team of about 20 that work with this product.

The cloud version of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is scalable, without a doubt.

I'm using a database-based client of Enterprise Architect, and it is very scalable. 

We are testing it at the moment. I am working with four or five people in that area. After we have enough confidence in the product and we have a new project, we would most likely roll it out to a hundred plus people. There are two projects that are currently using Enterprise Architect within the company. One of them already has more than 100 users. The company I work for has 30,000 employees. It will be used by quite a lot of people.

It's scalable.

The scalability is fairly good. However, I do not have, for example, 100 users to be able to fully determine the scalability.

In my organization, we have the chief, enterprise, architect, infrastructure, and security architect that are supposed to use the solution. However, only one or two people are using it at this time.

We are pushing for evolving tools but I am not sure if we are going to increase the usage.

It is scalable. Right now, we've only got a hundred books, but we want to have hundreds of thousands of books. There are only three of us using it in our architecture group, and then there are probably 30 other architects in other parts of the company who are using it.

No. This product is a desktop tool and generally would not have any scalability issues unless using a centralized service, such as a database server.

We have 100 tests. We have one company that represents Sparx here in Canada. They work with us and also give us technical support.

It's easy to scale because we integrated with Jira. It was very quick to start our work. It's very easy. It's good.

I rate the scalability of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect a four out of five.

We have approximately 60 people in my organization using this solution.

We don't have a strong demand to have a highly scalable solution for building enterprise-related activities.

We have 50 users in our organization who are using this solution.

We may be increasing our usage, as we have had many acquisitions and have more people than we need.

It is quite scalable. I didn't have any need to involve 30 or 40 technical business analysts or users. We had just a few users because it is used during the business analysis and design phase. Every team can use its own installation.

I have not used it for large projects, but I have asked Sparx people whether it can have multi-faring and configuration management, and they said yes. 

I am the main trainer of my organization, and I am the only one who is using it.

This solution is scalable.

With very large projects, the loading time can become a bit longer, although not to the extent of becoming a great concern.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten, and we have 25 users using it.

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is a scalable solution. The number of users we have depends on the project. In some projects, we have about 20 people, or in small projects, just one person. 

It is a fixed license, so we don't have the functionality of scaling it. We have five people who are using this solution. They all are in the strategy area of the company.

I can't speak to the level of scalability of the product. The user community for our purposes is quite small. We haven't tested scaling it with larger user groups. However, it's not the type of tool you would role out to a larger community anyway. Therefore, from a performance scalability perspective, it's hard for me to comment.

That said, from a functional scalability perspective, it's packed with all kinds of features. Your enterprise architecture approach could certainly scale up to accommodate more and more of the types of analysis you'd want to perform.

We have two teams that use the solution. In one case, there are three people using it, and in another case there are seven.

The scalability issues limit us from expanding the use of the tool.

We have 25 people in our company that directly deal with this product.

The solution is very easy to scale. It's no problem at all. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.

No.

We have had no issues scaling it/

We've been able to scale it to our needs without issue.

The scalability could improve in my experience.

We have hundreds of employees in my company that are using this solution.

We've had no issues with scalability.

We don't have a lot of users because we are not developing the software ourselves. We just use a few models of the software.

I was using this product for teaching, without a real team effort, so with respect to the scalability, it is hard for me to tell. It seemed ready, but I don't know how many people could work together on it. I don't think that it is realistic to say that you want one hundred people to work on the same model. If it is that big then you should chop it up into smaller pieces.

Running large and complex models (ours contained thousands of objects) does require a powerful machine with 8+GB of RAM.

There were no issues with scalability. It handled increased volume easily, unlike erwin.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

Scalability is not a problem. You can always increase the footprint of what the thing can do because it's so powerful.

I maintain Sparx in my company. I'm a designer and I'm an architect. I get to do everything. So consequently my time is picked at. It's not like I can specialize in just doing architecture.

I do plan on increasing the usage of it. We don't use it every day. If I've got a finite state machine and I'm trying to figure out how to document it, then I'll go ahead and log into this and try to figure out what I have to do to document a state machine and apply it to what I'm doing.

That kind of thing is always difficult. It's not just coming up with C++ classes and just a bunch of UML, but there are things that you have to have both the graphical presentation and the words pulled together to figure out what the heck is going on in this design.

Scalability is not a problem at all. You can always increase the footprint of what the thing can do due to the fact that it's so powerful.

I do plan on increasing the usage of it. If I've got a finite state machine and I'm trying to figure out "how do I document this thing", then I'll go headlong into this solution and try to figure out what I have to do to document everything and apply it to what I'm doing. 

The specific design use cases can be difficult. It's not just coming up with C++ classes and stuff like that. It's just a bunch of UML, but there are things that you have to have both the graphical presentation and the words fold together to figure out what the heck is going on in this design. That's why I'll probably continue to use it, and expand my usage of it.

No, and I’ve worked on repositories with well over a hundred users.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

Perfect - never had any problems.

There were scalability issues. The HTML generation with very large models, over 4000 diagrams, can be problematic. It will take several hours to generate.

We have had no issues scaling it as needed.

No issues encountered.

No. We scaled to a team of about 8 people with no issues using SQL Server as the repository.

I can't really speak to the scalability of the solution. It's not something that I've actually attempted. It may be scalable, however, without actually trying, I can't say.

The solution is widely used in our organization. We're very likely to continue using it, however, I can't say that with 100% certainty.

We use it in a small environment, so I can't say too much about scalability. We also used the Lite version for our customers and we liked it.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

We have not scaled it as I am the only user in the company.

We've had no issues scaling it to our needs.

We've had no issues scaling it, but I need to caveat that I've only experienced working with teams of up to 10 colleagues.

Availability - No, but I should caveat that I've only experienced working with teams of up to 10 colleagues.

Scalability becomes an issue as long as we are working on file based repository.

There have been no issues scaling it to our needs.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

We had no issues scaling it for our needs.

We had no issues scaling it for our needs.

We found it very difficult to scale this solution.

We're not sure if it was a limitation with the client security, but we had some problems. I don't think that Sparx is non-scalable, but maybe it can try to adapt to different clients.

We have not tried to scale the solution yet but there are add-ons and extensions that are available.

No issues encountered.

We had no issues scaling it to our needs.

I had some problems in the past when we had 50 concurrent users and it was based on the Oracle database. Because it was based on the Oracle database, we had some issues with performance. I don't know if it was the problem of Enterprise Architect or the wrong setup of the Oracle database. I did encounter some issues with the installations of that site for 50 concurrent users.

Right now we are just starting. It will be probably something around 10 users but not concurrent. For concurrent users, maybe there will be around five. For the main users, it will be about 10. The others are some roles like business process modeling experts, database experts, and solutions architect. In total, there will be three types of main user roles.

So far, no. We use the local database. In the future, we have to start using a central Database (Cloud?).

We have had no issues with scaling it for our needs.

We have been able to scale it to our needs.

No issues with scalability.