We performed a comparison between IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."With this tool it is interesting to show the info to the client and explain where the traffic is."
"It's given us the ability to create various real-time network performance reports and distribute them to any colleague who can access these reports immediately."
"The network data collection has been very flexible for us. It's been thorough in areas that were lacking. They have a team that I've worked with to add other pieces to it. So if it's missing something out of the box, they work with me to add it. I was able to collect that data. It's not perfect, but it's pretty thorough."
"It's a great solution for highlighting and discovering useful information regarding our network's elements."
"SevOne’s data collection functionality is very good. From a collection point of view, we pull SNMP data, which is simple. It is easy to manipulate the pull in the estate. It is really simple compared to some of the other products that we have used. However, for deferred data, i.e., things that we import or don't pull directly, we tend to have a preplanned integration. So, its Universal Collector is really useful."
"We have benefited mainly from the use of the dashboard interface. It makes the network visually interesting for other people who are not in the network. A lot of people are not network techies who understand streams in the network. Based on location, we have streams coming in and out. They can see visually when there is some problem. They don't need to understand all the network technology behind it to be able to understand if everything is working well or if there is a problem."
"SevOne provides support for all universal connectors. They internally work with other data sources to get features implemented. We have an SD-WAN implementation and use other app data to monitor performance. If you pull that data into one centralized location, that is very useful for management."
"One of the solution's biggest strengths is its capacity management performance, with out-of-the-box reports through NMS, as well as its ability to collect NetFlow-related data from devices. The collection of network performance and flow data is important because we have many critical business applications."
"The initial setup was relatively easy, and we didn't have to install anything. All we had to do was put on the devices we wanted to monitor."
"The solution can be deployed quickly."
"The more valuable feature of this solution is the Exchange feature."
"The solution is great for monitoring. If something is going wrong, we can immediately find the root cause."
"The most valuable feature is application monitoring."
"One of the most valuable features are the reports. They're pretty good. Also, the ease of installation and customization for the client is another feature that we value. SolarWinds has a lot of features but these are the ones I like the most. We also like that the KPIs have the ability to be preset."
"Management Console - Managing service to each server enrolled in the Solarwinds is much easier. Using a web base console, you can control your service much convenient way. There is no need to login remotely. It save a lot of time and effort."
"The features like trends, capacity planning, recommendations, and diagnostics are the main items I focus on for added value."
"NMS has several areas for improvement. It should be more user-friendly inside of NMS for some of the functionality in there. It's been getting better the last version or two, but the there have been bugs in there whenever I've gone to new versions."
"The reports are easy to configure but they are a bit outdated in terms of appearance and visualization."
"The method of searching for SIP and the way to create the groups."
"Telemetry is hot these days, and IBM can improve SevOne's support for telemetry correction. Reporting is another feature that could be better. It provides the bare minimum functionality, which is good enough for most engineers, but the management isn't advanced. The new portal provides a much lighter view and better visualization, but the management is not so good."
"The tool needs improvement in non-Cisco SD-WAN."
"Software upgrades can be tricky is not easy."
"The user management features need to be improved. It would be nice if we had more granular control, or layers of control, out of the box."
"There are a lot of pain points. My main problem is that we don't have a high availability system. There are 20 peers. We're going to lose the end-of-life appliances that are old. If we lose a peer and it doesn't come back, we lose all that data. The reason we don't have high availability is because it's double the charge."
"An additional feature that would improve this solution is the ability to complete root cause analysis."
"SAM AppInsight for SQL: The ability to ignore fragmentation of specific indexes."
"A lot of times, we have to do a lot of manual cleanups."
"The tool's AppStack needs to improve in the storage monitoring part. It should also include an analytics and recommendation approach. If I have found a fault in a server or application, I would like to know what caused it and how do I recover from it."
"It needs time-based functions for monitoring. Some things need to be polled on a specific schedule or only during a specific window."
"Reporting is the only thing with which we currently have challenges. They have this in two ways. There is the report writer, which is the backend, and we also have web reports, which are on the console. So, they have removed the report writer for the backend reports, and we are making use of the web console, but most of the users are not finding it very interesting to use the frontend reports. I would like them to bring back the report writer. That's the key area within it to improve on the reporting. If they can bring back the report writer, then most users will actually be comfortable. I have some customers who are trying to export their report to an Excel format, but it is not possible because they said any report that has been done from the web console cannot be exported to Excel, but most of the customers need to export their reports to Excel. That's one area they need to work on."
"One area that could benefit from improvement is its performance"
"SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor could improve by having a cloud version. They have an observability platform but it still needs to be maintained by us."
More IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is ranked 16th in Server Monitoring with 53 reviews while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is ranked 11th in Server Monitoring with 38 reviews. IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is rated 8.4, while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) writes "We can get a new vendor certified and monitored in our system significantly faster than before". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor writes "We use this product for base and application monitoring. ". IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is most compared with Instana Infrastructure Monitoring, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds Network Device Monitor, NETSCOUT nGeniusONE and Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is most compared with Azure Monitor, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Nagios XI. See our IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) vs. SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor report.
See our list of best Server Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Server 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.
