We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and Nagios XI 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."Cisco UCS Manager is overall a good package because it gives a GUI interface and a CLI."
"Technical support has been good so far. We haven't had any issues with them. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide our company."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"What I like most about Cisco UCS Manager is the ease of administration. It also allows the central management of maintenance, installation, and configuration activities."
"The hardware is very powerful and it is a stable solution."
"Cisco UCS has different layers of security, and you can do multiple installations of your LIAMs on top of the server and Blade. You can install VMware, Windows Server, Hyper-V, etc."
"We can configure the Cisco UCS Manager, the profiles and interactions with the resource we manage."
"The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system."
"The most valuable feature of Nagios XI is customization. We can customize based on our requirements. We can do modifications and implement a lot of scripts. Additionally, it is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is its support for different types of devices, where it can use all of the equipment that you need."
"Though I downplayed the administrative NCC GUI, this is by far the strongest aspect of the Nagios XI product."
"Nagios allows us to configure any device so that we can send pager alerts when people don't have access to emails. It also allows us to schedule downtime and maintenance."
"Nagios XI helps us monitor the bandwidth of the internet connection, HTTP, DNS, active directory services, and exchange data availability. We have multiple servers to monitor databases, availability of servers, and ping."
"You want to monitor a specific metric that nobody else has? You can do it even with the most basic of scripting skills, and you can always share it with the vast community of Nagios Exchange."
"Since this is an open source technology, if we are capable of writing the plugins in any scripting language, this product allows us to monitor anything we want."
"It is an open-source platform with valuable features for performance and stability."
"Upgrading the firmware is a difficult procedure."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"The installation and upgrade sytems need to be improved."
"The interface and the way it is constructed is very complex. They should work to simplify it. It's quite difficult for somebody who doesn't know the product very well. Users should be able to get proficient with it faster. There's definitely room for improvement there."
"The pricing can be better."
"The integration with other solutions could be better. I think Cisco can only integrate using Intersight. There is a second interface available as a SaaS platform, in the cloud, or on-premise. It's based on the Redfish protocol, which is standard for all the B-series servers in the market. We can integrate other solutions using API."
"Its user interface can be improved. It can be more user-friendly."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"The product's stability could be even better."
"I would like a much easier GUI so that I can delete events and logs, which will free up a lot of space."
"We often need to develop custom plugins to get Nagios to work the way we want it to work because the features we need are not always available in Nagios."
"I would like to see more customization in the network map because it is a bit tricky to use it."
"I would like to be able to extend it to all of our data centers, whether they are in the cloud or not. It would be helpful if I could connect everywhere."
"The way Nagios displays information isn't easy for a new user to understand. It's not intuitive enough. You need to read some tutorials or be trained to understand what it's displaying. Also, I think it needs more features to improve network visibility because there are some things you can't detect."
"The interface could be more user-friendly."
"The product uses the backend as Perl and could be modified to a more lightweight solution like what's being offered by other vendors."
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 29th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while Nagios XI is ranked 9th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 54 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while Nagios XI is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nagios XI writes "Great for monitoring IT services infrastructure with nice tools and helpful notifications". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, HPE OneView, Zabbix and Datadog, whereas Nagios XI is most compared with Nagios Core, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wireshark and Icinga. See our Cisco UCS Manager vs. Nagios XI report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.