We compared Datadog and PRTG Network Monitor across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Datadog users like its customizable displays, error tracking, and advanced AI/ML capabilities. PRTG Network Monitor customers like its user-centric approach, straightforward reporting, and customizability.
Room for Improvement: Datadog could enhance its usability and reduce its learning curve. Users said integration was another pain point. PRTG Network Monitor could improve its performance and resource efficiency. Other pain points include usability and cross-platform compatibility.
Service and Support: While many users spoke highly of Datadog’s support team, others reported slow support responses, especially in the Asia-Pacific region. 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: Datadog’s setup is considered straightforward, and users often receive help from a partner or vendor. 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: Opinions about Datadog's price are divided. Some users found it costly, but others thought it was acceptable. Some said the pricing model could be clearer and better explained. PRTG Network Monitor is deemed reasonably priced and cheaper than its competitors.
ROI: Users said Datadog saved them time and improved visibility into security blind spots. Users said that PRTG Network Monitor has proven to save time and money through automation and proactive support.
Comparison Results: Datadog is praised for its customizability, easy setup, and robust AI features. However, some users say it has room for improvement in areas like usability and integration. Datadog’s pricing and customer service received mixed reviews. 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.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"I have found error reporting and log centralization the most valuable features. Overall, Datadog provides a full package solution."
"Since we integrated Datadog, we have had increased confidence in the quality of our service, and we had an easier time increasing our delivery velocity."
"The ability to send notifications based on metadata from the monitor is helpful."
"Their interface is probably one of the easiest things to use because it lets non-developers and non-engineers quickly get access to metrics and pull business value out of them. We could put together dashboards and give it to people who are non-technical, then they can see the state of the world."
"The most valuable aspect is the APM which can monitor the metrics and latencies."
"It has provided visibility with ease of implementation and allowed multiple teams to quickly onboard it."
"The management of SLOs and their related burn-rate monitors have allowed us to onboard teams to on-call fast."
"The solution's SaaS model is easy to manage and works well in single- or multi-cloud environments."
"The most valuable feature is the notifications. As long as you spend time and think about what and when you want to be notified, it's always accurate. It is always there. I find things out before my Internet provider."
"The solution is very easy to use and the web provides information with ease."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"What I've found most valuable is the custom sensor, which allows you to write scripts or code to monitor a specific metric in your environment."
"The up-to-date graphs and the history are very good."
"Speed of deployment is one of the most valuable features."
"It has made our infrastructure more reliable."
"We use the remote probes a lot for our branch offices. Instead of deploying the full instance of PRTG, we'll put a remote probe out there. This simplifies the whole deployment for us."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Ingesting data from various sources to monitor the log metrics of the system can always improve so that, if something goes wrong, the right teams are alerted."
"The parallel editing of the dashboards should not cause users to lose the work of another person."
"I would like testing for data in the future."
"I would love to see more metrics or analytics in IoT devices."
"It can have a more modernized pricing mechanism. We're actually working with them to figure out how to become more modular and have a better and more modernized pricing mechanism. The issue with Datadog is that you have to buy the whole suite of different products, and you kind of get stuck in the old utilization of 40% of their suite. Most organizations today break down between application development, networking, and security. Therefore, there should be a way to break down different modules into just app dev, infosec, networking, etc. Customers have various needs across their business lines, and sometimes, they're just not willing to have tools that they're not using 100%. AppDynamics is probably a little bit better in terms of being modular."
"More granular control over dashboard sharing. Timeboard sharing."
"Deploying the agents is still very manual."
"When the logs are too big, and Datadog splits them, the JSON format breaks and it is not so useful for us."
"They just released a newer version of the desktop app, a beta version, that I have been trialing out. I prefer the older version, only because of how the layout is designed"
"In our organization, we encounter performance issues with our PRTG probe service. I saw documentation from the vendor or Paessler mentioning that there are limitations for WMI sensors. Other than that, we are okay with PRTG."
"The product could be improved by being cross-platform friendly."
"The dashboarding definitely needs improvement."
"I would like to see Office 365 monitoring. Essentially, it doesn't do it. I assumed not at all, but apparently it does it slightly. However, due to issues with APIs, they currently don't provide full monitoring for O365."
"With custom sensors, there is a lot of work which needs to be done in the background, just for it to be tailor-made for the specific thing that we are actually monitoring. We take a lot of time with the custom sensors. I would like to see the customer sensor be more robust and a bit more varied."
"PRTG Network Monitor could improve by having descriptions for the tab usages. The dashboards or interface could be easier to understand."
"I am not sure the solution is giving me all the needed feedback that we need. When something goes off on our IT infrastructure, it does tell me. However, it would be nice if it gave more intuitive information, e.g., the hard drive has gone up by 60 percent in an hour."
Datadog is ranked 2nd in Network Monitoring Software with 137 reviews while PRTG Network Monitor is ranked 5th in Network Monitoring Software with 96 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while PRTG Network Monitor is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". 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 ". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability, whereas PRTG Network Monitor is most compared with Zabbix, Centreon, Nagios XI, SolarWinds NPM and Datto Remote Monitoring and Management. See our Datadog vs. PRTG Network Monitor report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.
