We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) and Wireshark based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Troubleshooting solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution provides detailed device information, including serial numbers, configurations, IP, warranty status, and when the device was purchased. This is very helpful when it comes to replacing old devices."
"Its network discovery capabilities are pretty good. It kind of spiders out and detects pretty much everything on the network, e.g., things that we are using and not using anymore. Its network discovery capabilities allow me to detect these things so I can track them down and shut them off."
"The network mapping is an excellent feature, as each device is represented by a different shape or object, which is great for helping us, our staff in training, and our customers understand how the network is structured. Seeing the bigger picture helps immensely, as we provide remote support; we're not boots on the ground."
"The primary reason I wanted Auvik was SNMP. It discovers all the MIBs and pulls them. That's how it can monitor the things that other platforms don't."
"The most valuable features are the syslog tool and the nearly invaluable network map."
"The most advantageous feature is the ability to back up the configuration settings on switches and routers."
"It shows all my devices and it shows everything that is possibly connected to the network... It gives me how many devices or switches are connected, and what is connected to each switch, including how many printers are on it."
"The most valuable feature of Auvik is its ability to drill down and identify unusual activity on the network, such as unauthorized devices connecting to our Wi-Fi."
"It is a stable product. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"The transmission and reception issues are valuable."
"It gives us the ability to pinpoint problems and to communicate network problems with software and hardware vendors."
"I like the filtering feature as we can filter data easily. This feature is also available in tcpdump, but it's a simple piece of software. Wireshark is more advanced and has many features. It allows you to filter a lot of things. The output can be filtered easily. The most important feature is colorization. If I say, "Okay, this particular SMB protocol in red, it will show me red." It's easy to identify that protocol or capture data."
"It's easy to troubleshoot issues because there's a large online community."
"Packet-capture files can be hard to use due to their size. Wireshark has a tool called tshark that can parse the files with out opening them so that you can take large captures, say 2-10GB, and return only relevant information."
"The most valuable feature is the traffic gate, which shows which IPs are getting more bandwidth or traffic."
"The drill-down available for packet analysis is great. It gives a network security engineer insight into what is going on at the packet level and enables better troubleshooting."
"For the most part, it's great for visualizing the network mapping/topology for our organization. However, when complex VLAN networks are involved, sometimes, the picture can get a little cloudy. It would definitely be nice if there was some way of choosing a VLAN to view or something like that. They should definitely improve the handling of multiple networks and VLANs."
"There is room for improvement in the reporting aspect."
"They may need to add some more integration pieces with different vendors. For example, API keys aren't available for certain vendors. While everything that I have works with Auvik and gets monitored by it, there are a few network items I have that I would like to see deeper integration with..."
"If I could make a wish list of things that I would like to see from Auvik, I would definitely love to see more vendor integration with specific manufacturers. They've got that integration with Cisco, but it would be awesome to also have that with other major brands, such as HP, Dell, and Lenovo. It should have integration with more vendors, and in general, being able to quickly and easily access vendor-specific tools from the portal would be amazing."
"The solution can improve by increasing the tech file management capability."
"The user interface could be a little bit faster, and there should be a legend in the map."
"They need to improve the reporting system. They still don't have a proper reporting system in Auvik. They have built a dashboard in Power BI using APIs, but they should build some sort of report within Auvik itself. If Auvik fixes the reporting or comes up with a good reporting module, it will change the game."
"After Auvik inventories a Windows device, installing a lightweight that would allow a remote connection would be excellent. A technician could use that agent to gain remote control over the client's computer, allowing us to troubleshoot remotely."
"It is difficult to scale this solution."
"In the future, it would be nice to see color coding. It is just black and white."
"Wireshark's UI isn't easy to handle and doesn't have as nice a view as Omnipeek."
"The initial setup depends upon the basics. You need to have a clear understanding of the basics."
"Wireshark is similar to an OS defense tool, meaning that it runs on an OS such as Ubuntu and Fedora, but I'm unsure if it's compatible with Windows or if it's a straightforward process to run it on Windows. Right now, my team needs to run Wireshark from a dongle to use it, so it's an OS-dependable tool, and that's an area for improvement. I was unable to use Wireshark on Windows, and I couldn't capture it, as I'm unsure how to configure the wireless card into monitoring mode on Windows. The process was straightforward on Linux, but it wasn't the case on Windows OS. It seems Wireshark isn't compatible with all OS. For example, you can analyze the log, and you can analyze it on the Windows server, but you can't do a capture in Windows. Configuring Wireshark for Windows isn't as easy as configuring it for Linux."
"With Wireshark, you cannot download and utilize the packet in automation."
"Whenever we select one of the packets, in terms of the number of bytes, for example, there are three planes, and in the detailed plane, I have to count the number of bytes manually."
"There is a disadvantage when it comes to sampling intervals. Additionally, I've heard from a colleague that Wireshark might be less effective in the voice domain."
More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in Network Troubleshooting with 139 reviews while Wireshark is ranked 4th in Network Troubleshooting with 61 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while Wireshark is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Auvik Network Management (ANM) writes "Enables us to get on top of issues before they become an outage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Wireshark writes "User-friendly with an easy setup and a nice interface". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM and Zabbix, whereas Wireshark is most compared with Nagios XI, Zabbix, SolarWinds NPM, Colasoft Capsa and Dynatrace. See our Auvik Network Management (ANM) vs. Wireshark report.
See our list of best Network Troubleshooting vendors.
We monitor all Network Troubleshooting 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.
