We performed a comparison between CA Unified Communications Monitor and SolarWinds NPM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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 use the solution to meet the needs of the customer."
"Good end-to-end monitoring"
"It's easy to understand, even if you are not too technical."
"I can do everything remotely, including running PowerShell scripts or performing standard updates."
"I believe the ease of setup and use, including everything, from the initial installation to the discovery of devices is the most valuable."
"We found that it was easy to operate, and it was simple if anyone has entry-level working experience or even if someone is not experienced."
"It's a very good tool and a very stable tool."
"You can monitor performance counters effortlessly."
"I like SolarWinds support because it's 24/7. You describe your issues, your situation and maybe two or three hours later you can discuss a solution with a technical engineer."
"It is scalable."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"All the features and functions of the solution can be improved."
"The solution should have automatic baseline detection."
"My team has had a lot of issues with support."
"An area for improvement in SolarWinds NPM is the short retention period. Currently, it's just for seven days of data, which is very low, making it hard for my organization to keep that data. SolarWinds recommended a seven-day retention period, but my organization needs a fourteen-day data retention period. Hence, I'd like an increase in the retention period or the database limit in SolarWinds NPM because you can't go back to the data for any investigation if seven days have passed. Another area for improvement in SolarWinds NPM is the database, which needs to be a bit more mature. I want a modified database in the next release of SolarWinds NPM. I'd also like more options added to groups because, currently, it's very limited."
"This solution would benefit from expanding on the capabilities within the API."
"Time: A worldwide deployment can be confusing for dispersed users with non-local times. Each node should have a local time (with summer offset if appropriate) & each user should view & report in their local time."
"GUI needs improvement with a more graphical dashboard."
"We'd like to see a bit more automation in the future."
"SolarWinds NPM needs to increase its elements. One polling engine can only support 10,000 elements then it becomes slow. There are limitations even if you have the full SLX version license."
"In terms of scalability, there is room for improvement. When you start monitoring, if you have so many interfaces and you're trying to monitor them at a faster interval, or a shorter interval, you get to a point where you need to request another node."
Earn 20 points
CA Unified Communications Monitor is ranked 77th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring while SolarWinds NPM is ranked 4th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 147 reviews. CA Unified Communications Monitor is rated 6.6, while SolarWinds NPM is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CA Unified Communications Monitor writes "Good end-to-end voice quality monitoring and offers valuable features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds NPM writes "High-level, comprehensive, and proactive monitoring in a user-friendly interface". CA Unified Communications Monitor is most compared with , whereas SolarWinds NPM is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, ManageEngine OpManager, ThousandEyes and Entuity. See our CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. SolarWinds NPM report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors and best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.