We compared Nagios Core and PRTG Network Monitor across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Nagios Core is an adaptable solution praised for its integration, customizability, and ability to effectively monitor server availability and network connectivity. PRTG Network Monitor customers like its user-centric approach, straightforward reporting, and customizability.
Room for Improvement: Nagios Core users have requested better documentation, improved scalability, and a more user-friendly configuration process. PRTG Network Monitor could improve its performance and resource efficiency. Other pain points include usability and cross-platform compatibility.
Service and Support: Nagios Core lacks direct customer service, but users can generally find help from a supportive open-source community and large knowledge base. PRTG Network Monitor received mixed reviews for its customer service. Some users commended the support team’s prompt service, while others reported slow response times and noted the lack of remote session support.
Ease of Deployment: Nagios Core's setup is generally seen as well-documented and straightforward. PRTG Network Monitor’s setup isn’t considered to be overly complex. Deployment times may vary depending on the environment's complexity and device count.
Pricing: Nagios Core is free, but users may incur costs for installation and configuration. PRTG Network Monitor is deemed reasonably priced and cheaper than its competitors.
ROI: Nagios Core users say they have saved money by replacing paid monitoring tools with this open-source solution. Users said that PRTG Network Monitor has proven to save time and money through automation and proactive support.
Comparison Results: Nagios Core is a flexible open-source solution that is highly customizable and offers robust functionality commonly found in paid enterprise solutions. However, some users have said that Nagios Core becomes unwieldy when used at a large scale and that the documentation could be more thorough. PRTG Network Monitor is regarded as a simple, user-friendly, and cost-effective solution, but users would like to see improvements in performance, documentation, integration, and technical support.
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"It is fairly easy to set up, and we can monitor pretty much everything we want to."
"I like the way the solution sends alerts and how it keeps on escalating them."
"The notifications are definitely one of the most valuable features of Nagios Core. We know what to look for and what to expect when things are down."
"The most valuable features are the reports and the way it generates the report in a graphical manner."
"Dashboard provides monitor of total assets."
"The application performance monitoring feature is valuable."
"It has made the life of the network operations staff more proactive in managing the resources of the infrastructure. It prevents disasters long before they can take place."
"Other products are good but from the configuration point of view Nagios is really very lightweight. The price is really good in my opinion. Another important thing is that my Nagios engine still works with Dual core 8GB ram for the last 10 years."
"There is a simplicity to setting up the extra sensors. It's really easy for us to build infrastructure and start monitoring very quickly."
"It is user-friendly. It is easy to set up health checks within PRTG and use scans. It is like a self-service tool, and anyone can configure their own settings within PRTG."
"One of its valuable features is the fact that it handles multiple operating systems... And I like the fact that it tells me when things are about to fall over, which means I can preempt it and not have to wake up at three in the morning to fix it."
"The technical support seems to be quick, clever, and has a comprehensive knowledge base online, which is fantastic."
"It helps the entire organization become digitally enabled."
"Accessibility, ease of use (Web GUI, MobileApps). In general, compared with other software"
"The bandwidth monitoring is a very attractive feature, it can tell you the bandwidth utilization while it is attempting to connect to the host for feedback."
"The authentication links into our standard Active Directory authentication, which is very good."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"I believe Nagios Core will need to provide an option for big data platforms in the future."
"Nagios Core could improve by adding a user interface. If you want the user interface you have to use Nagios XI."
"We're using the free version, which limits us in terms of the things that we can do. If we had the paid version, a lot of our issues would probably go away. For example, we can't isolate instances that are being built or updated with the production ones. When they're being built, on Nagios, they're showing in red. It'd be nice to be able to partition those off until they're all green, and then we can bring them into the environment. This is probably because we've got the free version and not the paid version. If we went for the paid version, it would probably allow us to do exactly what we want to or remove the restrictions that we have, but if we are able to isolate instances in the free version, it would make life much easier."
"The initial setup process could be easier."
"There is room for improvement in the graphics."
"The mapping is a little hard."
"Cloud monitoring is an area for improvement because there aren't too many plugins available."
"I would like to see more training videos."
"Once you start going above 5000 sensors, things do start to get a bit shaky. There are some best practice out there that you will need to adopt and be aware of."
"The thing that we do struggle with a bit is in the historic data. If I want look over 30 days, because it averages out onto one graph, you can't zoom in and drill down information."
"Improvements in data storage flexibility, such as allowing customers to specify data retention periods, would enhance PRTG."
"PRTG would be improved if it required less memory to run."
"I would like to have a VM version that can be installed on a cloud such as Azure. We're using Azure, and we're eliminating on-premise servers. It would be helpful to have a PRTG version that can be installed on the Azure cloud."
"Having a Unix implementation or Unix installation could be an improvement. Right now, it's based just on Windows, and that's a problem for some customers."
"There is room for improvement in this solution for the performance and third-party monitoring protocols. They need to be updated to the latest ones."
"Scalability is the only major sticking point for me. There is a recommended number of sensors, which is around 10,000 and we're double that... The only option we have to scale is to buy another core, which would be a separate, stand-alone instance..."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Nagios Core is ranked 7th in Network Monitoring Software with 46 reviews while PRTG Network Monitor is ranked 5th in Network Monitoring Software with 96 reviews. Nagios Core is rated 8.0, while PRTG Network Monitor is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Nagios Core writes "An Open Source Fully Featured Data Centre Monitoring Tool". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PRTG Network Monitor writes "It's an all-in-one solution, and net flow is included in the licensing ". Nagios Core is most compared with Zabbix, Nagios XI, Icinga, Centreon and Meraki Dashboard, whereas PRTG Network Monitor is most compared with Zabbix, Centreon, Nagios XI, SolarWinds NPM and ManageEngine OpManager. See our Nagios Core vs. PRTG Network Monitor report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Network 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.