Turbonomic OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Turbonomic is the #1 ranked solution in our list of top Cloud Analytics tools. It is most often compared to VMware vRealize Operations (vROps): Turbonomic vs VMware vRealize Operations (vROps)

What is Turbonomic?

Turbonomic, an IBM Company, provides Application Resource Management (ARM) software used by customers to assure application performance and governance by dynamically resourcing applications across hybrid and multicloud environments. Turbonomic Network Performance Management (NPM) provides modern monitoring and analytics solutions to help assure continuous network performance at scale across multivendor networks for enterprises, carriers and managed services providers.

For further information, please visit www.turbonomic.com

www.turbonomic.com/resources/case-studies

Turbonomic is also known as VMTurbo Operations Manager.

Turbonomic Buyer's Guide

Download the Turbonomic Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2021

Turbonomic Customers

JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citi, ANZ, Credit Suisse, State Street, Morningstar, VOYA, TPICAP, LPL Financial, Cisco, BMC, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Agilysys, MetLife, Hiscox, Humana, Tokio Marine, Allscripts, SHARP, Providence St. Joseph Health, NBC Universal, pwc, KPMG, Wayfair, Carhartt, Tiffany & Co., UCLA, NASA, NIH

Turbonomic Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Turbonomic pricing:
  • "When we have expanded our licensing, it has always been easy to make an ROI-based decision. So, it's reasonably priced. We would like to have it cheaper, but we get more benefit from it than we pay for it. At the end of the day, that's all you can hope for."
  • "In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."
  • "If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."
  • "The pricing and licensing are fair. We purchase based on benchmark pricing, which we have been able to get. There are no surprise charges nor hidden fees."
  • "I know there have been some issues with the billing, when the numbers were first proposed, as to how much we would save. There was a huge miscommunication on our part. Turbonomic was led to believe that we could optimize our AWS footprint, because we didn't know we couldn't. So, we were promised savings of $750,000. Then, when we came to implement Turbonomic, the developers in AWS said, "Absolutely not. You're not putting that in our environment. We can't scale down anything because they coded it." Our AWS environment is a legacy environment. It has all these old applications, where all the developers who have made it are no longer with the company. Those applications generate a ton of money for us. So, if one breaks, we are really in trouble and they didn't want to have to deal with an environment that was changing and couldn't be supported. That number went from $750,000 to about $450,000. However, that wasn't Turbonomic's fault."
  • "We see ROI in extended support agreements (ESA) for old software. Migration activities seem to be where Turbonomic has really benefited us the most. It's one click and done. We have new machines ready to go with Turbonomic, which are properly sized instead of somebody sitting there with a spreadsheet and guessing. So, my return on investment would certainly be on currency, from a software and hardware perspective."
  • "I'm not involved in any of the billing, but my understanding is that is fairly expensive."

Filter Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
RM
Director of Enterprise Server Technology at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Helps us optimize cloud operations, reducing our cloud costs

What is our primary use case?

Our use case: Planning for sizing servers as we move them to the cloud. We use it as a substitute for VMware DRS. It does a much better job of leveling compute workload across an ESX cluster. We have a lot fewer issues with ready queue, etc. It is just a more sophisticated modeling tool for leveling VMs across an ESX infrastructure. It is hosted on-prem, but we're looking at their SaaS offering for reporting. We do some reporting with Power BI on-premise, and it's deployed to servers that we have in Azure and on-prem.

Pros and Cons

  • "The proactive monitoring of all our open enrollment applications has improved our organization. We have used it to size applications that we are moving to the cloud. Therefore, when we move them out there, we have them appropriately sized. We use it for reporting to current application owners, showing them where they are wasting money. There are easy things to find for an application, e.g., they decommissioned the server, but they never took care of the storage. Without a tool like this, that storage would just sit there forever, with us getting billed for it."
  • "The issue for us with the automation is we are considering starting to do the hot adds, but there are some problems with Windows Server 2019 and hot adds. It is a little buggy. So, if we turn that on with a cluster that has a lot of Windows 2019 Servers, then we would see a blue screen along with a lot of applications as well. Depending on what you are adding, cores or memory, it doesn't necessarily even take advantage of that at that moment. A reboot may be required, and we can't do that until later. So, that decreases the benefit of the real-time. For us, there is a lot of risk with real-time."

What other advice do I have?

Unfortunately, a lot of our infrastructure in the cloud is still legacy. So, we can't make full use of it to go out and resize a server, because it will bring the application down. However, what we are doing is setting up integration servers now. This puts a change control out to make the recommended change and the owner of the server can approve that change, then it will take place within a maintenance window. We don't manage resources in real-time. Most of our applications just don't support that. We don't have enough changes required that it would be mutually beneficial to us, so we aren't…
Matthew Koozer
Ict Infrastructure Team Cloud Engineer at a mining and metals company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
Provides recommendations whether workloads should be scaled up or down

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use it as a cost reduction tool regarding our cloud spend in Azure, as far as performance optimization or awareness. We use Turbonomic to identify opportunities where we can optimize our environments from a cost perspective, leveraging the utilization metrics to validate resources are right-sized correctly to avoid overprovisioning of public cloud workloads. We also use Turbonomic to identify workloads that require additional resources to avoid performance constraints. We use the tools to assist in the orchestration of Turbonomic generated decisions so we can incorporate those… more »

Pros and Cons

  • "The tool provides the ability to look at the consumption utilization over a period of time and determine if we need to change that resource allocation based on the actual workload consumption, as opposed to how IT has configured it. Therefore, we have come to realize that a lot of our workloads are overprovisioned, and we are spending more money in the public cloud than we need to."
  • "There is an opportunity for improvement with some of Turbonomic's permissions internally for role-based access control. We would like the ability to come up with some customized permissions or scope permissions a bit differently than the product provides."

What other advice do I have?

It doesn't pick up the entire supply chain automatically. It requires minimal effort in configuration. We have to show a relationship in a sense that this workload is associated with another workload. However, once that relationship is established, the solution helps us manage our business-critical applications by understanding the underlying supply chain of resources. Our capital expenses are relatively flat. We are not purchasing any new equipment. We are actually in a consolidation process. Everything is getting moved to the public cloud. From an operational perspective, with our workloads…
Learn what your peers think about Turbonomic. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2021.
536,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
David Grudek
System Engineer at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 10Leaderboard
Looks at history and patterns to understand our spikes and when to move things around, always keeping things in perfect balance

What is our primary use case?

We pretty much use it only for load balancing between hosts. We're a payroll company and Turbonomic is really important for us from about November until March, each year, because our end-of-year processing increases our load by six to seven times. That's especially true in November and December when companies are running their last payrolls. If we're going to be losing any customers, they definitely have to finalize everything all at one shot. In addition, companies that pay out bonuses at the end of the year also have to be running all these extra payrolls. There are a slew of reasons for… more »

Pros and Cons

  • "I only deal with the infrastructure side, so I really couldn't speak to more than load balancing as the most valuable feature for me. It provides specific actions that prevent resource starvation. It always keeps things in perfect balance."
  • "It would be good for Turbonomic, on their side, to integrate with other companies like AppDynamics or SolarWinds or other monitoring softwares. I feel that the actual monitoring of applications, mixed in with their abilities, would help. That would be the case wherever Turbonomic lacks the ability to monitor an application or in cases where applications are so customized that it's not going to be able to handle them. There is monitoring that you can do with scripting that you may not be able to do with Turbonomic."

What other advice do I have?

If you're looking into Turbonomic, just do it. You will not regret it. The biggest thing that I've learned is that you don't realize how much your hardware can do until it's truly balanced. Some people operate foolishly and they just won't step up because they're being cheap. Other people want to be ultra-conservative because they don't ever want to have a problem, but using software like this, you realize that there is a balance. If you trust the software, you get to utilize your hardware better while still feeling like you have those reserves available without putting yourself at risk by…
Anita H
AVP Global Hosting Operations at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10Leaderboard
Saved us a significant amount of money by rightsizing instances

What is our primary use case?

We wanted the performance assurance because we have seasonal spikes in our volume. One of the use cases was making sure that we could adjust for seasonal spikes in volume. Another use case was taking a look at how we increase our density and make a more effective utilization of the assets that we have on the floor. The third use case was the planning, being able to adjust for mergers, acquisitions, divestitures, and quickly being able to separate out the infrastructure required to support that workload. We just upgraded and are using the latest on-prem version. We use Turbonomic for our… more »

Pros and Cons

  • "In our organization, optimizing application performance is a continuous process that is beyond human scale. We would not be able to do the number of actions that Turbonomic takes on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. It is humanly impossible with the little micro adjustments that it can make. That is a huge differentiator. If you just figure each action could take anywhere very conservatively from five to 10 minutes to act upon, then you multiply that out by thousands of actions every month, it is easily something where you could say, "I am saving a couple of FTEs.""
  • "It would be nice for them to have a way to do something with physical machines, but I know that is not their strength Thankfully, the majority of our environment is virtual, but it would be nice to see this type of technology across some other platforms. It would be nice to have capacity planning across physical machines."

What other advice do I have?

We are using it mainly to manage the resource utilization for our virtual environment. We are using it for project planning, like the Windows 2008 upgrade with the infrastructure that needs to be built out for that. We are using it to manage our cloud expenses and the utilization within the cloud, which then drives cost reductions there. In the last few months, we started to do the application tagging so we can start to get down to specific application dashboards. This year, we want to start to drive more of the automation to reclaim unused resources, so I can then go ahead and delay further…
Chris Bannoura
Sr System Engineer at Liquidity Services
Real User
Top 10Leaderboard
Gives engineers the ability to launch environments without having to create a bunch of changes down the road

What is our primary use case?

There have been quite a few use cases, even some that were probably unintended. * Reduce our footprint and cost. It handled that perfectly. * Handle our RI purchasing, which is what we are in the process of doing now. * Automating shutdowns and startups so we can turn machines off when they are not being used. We have several machines in this category. We are going to continue to add more to it, once we go through some finalization. We are using it to delete unattached volumes to manage databases. The unintended use case was that we started looking at what else could we save. We realized that… more »

Pros and Cons

  • "Turbonomic has helped optimize cloud operations and reduced our cloud costs significantly. Overall, we are at about 40 percent savings, and we spend about three million a year just in Azure. It reduces the size of the VMs, putting them into the right template for usage. People don't realize that you don't have to future-proof a virtual machine in Azure. You just need to build it for today. As the business or service grows, you can scale up or out. About 90 percent of all the costs that we've reduced has been from sizing machines appropriately."
  • "I would love to see Turbonomic analyze backup data. We have had people in the past put servers into daily full backups with seven-year retention and where the disk size is two terabytes. So, every single day, there is a two terabyte snapshot put into a Blob somewhere. I would love to see Turbonomic say, "Here are all your backups along with the age of them," to help us manage the savings by not having us spend so much on the storage in Azure. That would be huge."

What other advice do I have?

We are installing the Kubernetes version of Turbonomic now. Then, it will be able to see application issues when they come up. Once we transitioned to Turbonomic version 8, we will be able to see the application side of things, which we were not able to see before. Application performance wasn't even something we considered until Turbonomic 8 was announced and revealed to us. This will open a whole new door for us in terms of savings that we probably never even considered in the past. I am pretty impartial to Turbonomic. I have not used anything to optimize cloud previously, but I'm going to…
Todd Winkler
Principal Engineer at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
Lets us take a good look at our environment and decide how we will size our workloads into new areas

What is our primary use case?

Currently, we're doing migrations for older versions of Windows, both in the Azure Cloud and on-prem in our VMware vCenters. We use this tool to do comparisons between the current and future workloads and what would they look like, based on the usage. So, it is kind of a rightsizing exercise or rightsizing, either downsizing or upsizing, depending on the requirements. We just put all that information into Turbonomic, and it builds us out a new VM, exactly the size that we need, based on the trending and analysis. Then, you can also put in some factors, saying, "Look, it was Windows 2008, and… more »

Pros and Cons

  • "It has automated a lot of things. We have saved 30 to 35 percent in human resource time and cost, which is pretty substantial. We don't have a big workforce here, so we have to use all the automation we can get."
  • "There are a few things that we did notice. It does kind of seem to run away from itself a little bit. It does seem to have a mind of its own sometimes. It goes out there and just kind of goes crazy. There needs to be something that kind of throttles things back a little bit. I have personally seen where we've been working on things, then pulled servers out of the VMware cluster and found that Turbonomic was still trying to ship resources to and from that node. So, there has to be some kind of throttling or ability for it to not be so buggy in that area. Because we've pulled nodes out of a cluster into maintenance mode, then brought it back up, and it tried to put workloads on that outside of a cluster. There may be something that is available for this, but it seems very kludgy to me."

What other advice do I have?

If you have a big shop, and it's scattered all over the place, then definitely take a look at this tool. Make sure you take a look at this tool because there is probably fit for purpose licensing for any size organization. It's a great automation process. Turbonomic shows application metrics and estimates the impact of taking a suggested action based on its input from AppDynamics. So, we plug it into AppDynamics, then AppDynamics and Turbonomic seem to work together for that. It knows what business-critical applications we have, but I don't think it manages anything specifically within the…
DA
Infrastructure Manager at a insurance company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Recommendations regarding volumes and family types tell us how much we will be saving by implementing them

What is our primary use case?

We use the Reserved Instances and the recommendations of sizing of our family types in Azure. We use it for cost optimization for our workloads there. We started with the on-prem solution, but then we went with the SaaS model. Now, Turbonomic handles the installation and the support of the appliances.

Pros and Cons

  • "The recommendation of the family types is a huge help because it has saved us a lot of money. We use it primarily for that. Another thing that Turbonomic provides us with is a single platform that manages the full application stack and that's something I really like."
  • "In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings."

What other advice do I have?

At one point the most valuable feature for us was Reserved Instances. The only problem with that today is that last year we changed from the EA licensing model to an MCA. At this moment, unfortunately, the Reserved Instances is not working. They're still working on it. It's in the roadmap, but that definitely was a big selling point for us. It worked well for us because we purchase a lot of Reserved Instances for our VMs. Turbonomic makes a lot of recommendations to help prevent resource starvation. We can't implement all of them because it depends on our workloads. Not all the recommendations…
JK
Server Administrator at a logistics company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Provided us with pretty good savings on the front-end, helping us to correctly size VMs that were over-provisioned

What is our primary use case?

The primary reason we initially got it was to help us to right-size all of our VMs, to make sure that they were the appropriate size for the amount that they were being used. That was the biggest push to get this, and we implemented it. We have also discovered that Turbonomic can automatically suspend virtual machines that were on a schedule. For example, in the afternoons and the evenings when a VM wasn't going to be used, it could just be shut down, so that we wouldn't be charged eight to 10 hours of compute time, per machine, that wasn't going to be used at all during that time. That's been… more »

Pros and Cons

  • "It also brings up a list of machines and if something is under-provisioned and needs more compute power it will tell you, 'This server needs more compute power, and we suggest you raise it up to this level.' It will even automatically do it for you. In Azure, you don't have to actually go into the cloud provider to resize. You can just say, 'Apply these resizes,' and Turbonomic uses some back-end APIs to make the changes for you."
  • "There is room for improvement [with] upgrades. We have deployed the newer version, version 8 of Turbonomic. The problem is that there is no way to upgrade between major Turbonomic versions. You can upgrade minor versions without a problem, but when you go from version 6 to version 7, or version 7 to version 8, you basically have to deploy it new and let it start gathering data again. That is a problem because all of the data, all of the savings calculations that had been done on the old version, are gone. There's no way to keep track of your lifetime savings across versions."

What other advice do I have?

I don't think Turbonomic provides you with a single platform that manages the full application stack. It manages a lot of the infrastructure stuff, Layer 1 through Layer 3 of the OSI model. It's mostly focused on infrastructure and making sure your infrastructure isn't over-provisioned. I wouldn't say it could all the way through the application. Optimizing application performance on a continuous process is beyond the scope of a human to be able to do on a consistent basis. In other words, if you have 20 virtual machines, it's reasonable that a human could watch the utilization and determine…
See 7 more Turbonomic Reviews