We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Get our free report covering Amazon, VMware, Cloudability, and other competitors of Azure Cost Management. Updated: January 2022.
565,689 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Azure Cost Management alternatives and competitors

Infrastructure Manager at a insurance company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Recommendations regarding volumes and family types tell us how much we will be saving by implementing them
Pros and Cons
  • "The recommendation of the family types is a huge help because it has saved us a lot of money. We use it primarily for that. Another thing that Turbonomic provides us with is a single platform that manages the full application stack and that's something I really like."
  • "In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings."

What is our primary use case?

We use the Reserved Instances and the recommendations of sizing of our family types in Azure. We use it for cost optimization for our workloads there.

We started with the on-prem solution, but then we went with the SaaS model. Now, Turbonomic handles the installation and the support of the appliances.

How has it helped my organization?

The volumes feature lets us know which volumes or disks are not attached or that are not being used anymore and that we can go ahead and delete them. It tells us how much money we'll be saving if we delete them. It's the same thing with Reserved Instances. It has that ability, that visibility, with those recommendations. 

There is also the family type that tells you which family the VM is going to and how much you're going to be saving. Disk tiering is one of the latest features. If you go from premium to standard, it shows you just how much you're going to be saving. It makes those decisions based on metrics.

When it comes to cloud costs, to VMs, the solution is saving us about $30,000 a month. It has also definitely reduced our IT-related expenditures by about $40,000 per month. And when it comes to the human resource time involved in monitoring and optimizing our estate, it saves us about 20 hours a week.

What is most valuable?

The recommendation of the family types is a huge help because it has saved us a lot of money. We use it primarily for that. Another thing that Turbonomic provides us with is a single platform that manages the full application stack and that's something I really like. 

One other useful feature in Turbonomic is the support for Kubernetes. That's one of the things that I have worked on with Kevin, our account rep, from Turbonomic. We're going to work on setting that up because our developers are pushing hard for Kubernetes for containers this year. Knowing that it's supporting that is awesome.

Something that Turbonomic started doing, just a couple of months ago with one of their latest releases, is the potential savings when it comes to disks. It is very promising. They make recommendations based on the type of disks. For example, if you're using a premium SSD, it makes recommendations, based on I/O metrics, to go to a standard SSD. Those types of recommendations are very valuable and that's another area where we see cost savings, which is awesome.

What needs improvement?

One ask that I'm waiting for, now that they have the ability to make recommendations for disks, for volumes, and disk tiering, is all about consumption. For example, we have a lot of VMs now, and these VMs use a lot of disks. Some of these servers have 8 TB disks, but they're only being used for 200 GBs. That's a lot of money that we're wasting. In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings. And we would have more of a success rate than with the disk tiering, at least in our case.

Also, unfortunately, there is no support for cost optimization for networking.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using Turbonomic for about three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It was definitely more stable on-prem. The reason I say that is because we've had several times where we have run into licensing issues. I don't know why that has been the case, although they have been few and far between. 

But when it has no issues, it runs just as if it were on-prem. The performance and the stability are not a problem.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's a mature product. It very quickly detects when new VMs, new workloads, are added. You don't have to wait long. The tool picks things up very quickly in our environment.

How are customer service and technical support?

Their technical support is excellent. I would rate them a nine out of 10. Whenever I send an email, they respond back. The only reason I don't give them a 10 is that I have been waiting for some time now on the Reserve Instances to work again. That's the only thing that has been a downer because we rely on them heavily. We are now having to use the Azure tool for that, and before the issue with Reserve Instances, we didn't have to. There's a lot of overlap between Azure on Turbonomic, but Turbonomic works better for us.

An aspect of the Turbonomic team that I have found, working with them over the years, is that whenever we've had an issue, they have always been willing to listen and to address it and to add the features we need. For example, when we started, Reserved Instances was really not up to par. But they listened to their customers and they started making changes. As time has gone on, the product has matured. They've incorporated a lot of the features that we've asked for into their appliance.

How was the initial setup?

We tried it first on-prem, years ago. We used to host it. I installed it and updated it, working with the Turbonomic team. When it was hosted in our environment, I was responsible for everything.

The initial setup was straightforward. Because it was an appliance, the deployment took about an hour to stand it up. We use VMware on-prem so it was done with an OVA file, and it was pretty much a "next-next" process because the OVA is already packaged with how the tool should be deployed. There are certain custom inputs needed, like the name of the appliance, and how much storage. But everything else was already pre-packaged. The configuration definitely took a little bit longer.

The only downside was that Turbonomic came out with many releases. The latest releases had the latest features, but it required continuous upgrades. If we wanted to take advantage of one feature we continued to have to upgrade the appliance on-prem. That is why, when we found out that they do have a SaaS model, we went with that instead. We wanted Turbonomic to worry about things like the licensing, the updates, et cetera. We don't have to worry about that at all now, and that has been a huge relief. That has saved us a lot of time, for sure.

We didn't have to do any type of migration to their SaaS offering. They took care of everything in the back end.

We have five engineers who use the product, including a networking engineer, a storage engineer, and our DevOps team.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

There are competitors out there. Since we're in Azure, which is the only cloud vendor that we use today, it has something called cost Azure Advisor, to help you with costs. I've tried it because it comes with it and we're paying for it, but Turbonomic is a better tool for us. We always seem to gravitate more toward it because everything is right there in that single pane of glass. It gives you recommendations based on Reserve Instances, even though right now, unfortunately, that's not working 100 percent. It does a lot of things, like the family types and the deleted volumes, and that type of automation for us, which is awesome. Azure Advisor does give you that as well, but it doesn't have everything. We have to drill down in it and it's not easy to navigate.

What other advice do I have?

At one point the most valuable feature for us was Reserved Instances. The only problem with that today is that last year we changed from the EA licensing model to an MCA. At this moment, unfortunately, the Reserved Instances is not working. They're still working on it. It's in the roadmap, but that definitely was a big selling point for us. It worked well for us because we purchase a lot of Reserved Instances for our VMs.

Turbonomic makes a lot of recommendations to help prevent resource starvation. We can't implement all of them because it depends on our workloads. Not all the recommendations work for us because workloads on some of our VMs are very seasonal. There may be three times throughout the year, for about two weeks, where those VMs' usage is very high. They have to work at a high level. The solution can only go back a maximum of three months, and it won't work for us in some of those workloads because it doesn't have full visibility into the past year. But for some of our other workloads, those recommendations work.

Optimization of application performance is an ongoing process for us, especially as we move VMs from on-prem to Azure, or even build new VMs in Azure. More apps are being created and more services are being created, and we're taking advantage of that within Azure. However, we don't use Turbonomic's automation mode to continuously assure application performance by having the software manage resources in real-time. Our DevOps team is using Azure to control that automation.

For us, Turbonomic is an infrastructure service, VMs. As for applications, not yet, because now that we're introducing Kubernetes into our Azure environment, while it does have support for that, I don't know what it looks like yet. I have a meeting scheduled with them in order to configure that. It doesn't create it for you automatically in the back end. But it's more for our IaaS, infrastructure as a service. For storage, the closest thing now is the disk tiering with recommendations for going from and to different types of standard and premium SSD and HDD disks. Before, there wasn't that level of support. It was just VMs and family types, in our case.

We use manual execution for implementing the solution’s actions. We use manual because it depends on the business. We run a 24/7 shop. That's how it has always been on-prem, and that's how it is now in Azure, for our production VMs. We need to schedule maintenance windows because some of the recommendations from Turbonomic require a reboot. We need to schedule downtime with the application owners within the business.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Flag as inappropriate
User at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Good for complex organizations and has been stable, but needs more automation
Pros and Cons
  • "The pricing isn't too expensive."
  • "Right now, what we're doing is we are manually putting the data in it, which is something which we don't like about Cloudability."

What is our primary use case?

We are just using it for Azure and Google, as we might have different Cloud vendors and what we're trying to do here is right-sizing so that it can send us reports for all the subscriptions, for example, in Azure. We'd like it to tag the information and all the costs related to the information. That way, we can do the right sizing report from there, and we can rate it. 

How has it helped my organization?

The solution has definitely improved our organization and how it functions.

What it does is it will give us a brief report. In two weeks and for subscriptions, we can see, okay how much the cost has been increasing, and we can limit it there. We can check it and we can find out who has put up more VMs or who has spun up their sources and who is doing what. We can make a report and we can check with them if they're really using it or not. We can send the reports and if the chargeback is missing, we can highlight that also and we can correct it. Therefore, it can give us some detailed information about our business that we can go through.

We're able to see reports that can show us areas where compute costs can be lowered, where we're wasting money, etc. It gives us great visibility across our teams and processes. 

What is most valuable?

We need to do the costs and we need to do the chargeback to different departments. On the Cloud, that is a challenge right now as either way you divide the subscription or you create the resource groups, it's hard. It doesn't matter which model you go with. We need to do the chargeback to different teams. 

If somebody is using, say, a database that might be hosted on to some other team, we should be able to do the chargeback based on that. It covers the different business mappings that we have to do and collects the data. There might be some managed and unmanaged subscriptions also. We need to distinguish between that and do the chargeback accordingly. This solution helps with that process.

The pricing isn't too expensive.

What needs improvement?

The only problem with Cloudability we are running is, we have the consultants here who implemented and now their contract is going to end. It already actually ended in December. They are rolling out the knowledge transfer to our teams internally. The way they did it, we are involved now, and it's more like manual work, which we don't like. Cloudability is an external tool, a third-party tool. We would like it to work as a connection to Azure itself and get all the data.

Right now, what we're doing is we are manually putting the data in it, which is something which we don't like about Cloudability. When we talked to the consultant himself, he said, "It's due to how our company's way of working and doing the chargeback." It's complicated and we have to do this manual process. That's the only reason, I was looking for other options. There might be a tool that can provide everything without doing manual work.

I'm not sure if any features are missing per se as we are just really starting to use the solution and we need to dig in deeper to take in all of its functionality.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've only recently begun to work with the solution. It's been about four or five months at this point. It hasn't even been a year just yet. We're still currently rolling it out.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We just recently started using it and it's not widely used or open to our organization just yet. It's still in, I would say, a phase where we're testing. It's not in production yet, and therefore we haven't faced any bugs yet.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is still relatively new to us, and, as we've only really started to implement it, we have not tried to scale it just yet. Therefore, I can't speak to its scalability just yet.

There might be 15 to 20 users so far right now. However, this number will increase. We are still in the initial phase. It's only the direct people, our admins, who are trying to make this work or try to make sense of it. Then we can lend it to the users. However, the access control is easy. You can give out admin access or user access to the reports.

How are customer service and technical support?

I was in touch with technical support when we accidentally dropped all the business mappings. That's when we discovered, there are no backups being done on the application side. We connected with Cloudability, and they were able to provide us with JSON of the backup from one day back. That worked for us as there were not many changes, as per the functionality. Therefore, we were able to restore it from the JSON scripts.

I would rate them overall at a five or six. The thing is, I still have to work with them to make sure it's backed up daily. Right now, we are thinking to do it quarterly or monthly. However, at the speed that we are doing everything, the data might change frequently. If we wait that long, it's possible we might lose data. We can do other things also, behind the scenes, and in between, we can do staging, etc., and then we can record our steps.

Still, that's something we need to connect with them on in order to properly connect the dots, maybe. It should be backed up daily. Other than that, their response was quick, however, we just have to work on these technical details. It might be pending on our side. Maybe the person who might be working with them overlooked this thing.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We're currently looking into other options as this solution is too manual. We need something much more automated.

We might be using the Azure Cost Management only, however, with Cloudability, we can use multiple clouds. It's for Azure, AWS, and Google Cloud also, as we have footprints on all of those. That is the only reason we're using Cloudability. With it, you can see the cost management in one tool, instead of using three different tools for each different cloud.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not straightforward. It's a bit complex. It's not straightforward as the data which we are getting from Azure doesn't make any sense. Right now, what we're doing is, we are getting all this tag information, subscription information, as we're getting it in a CSV and then putting in a database and then creating a JSON and then loading it to the API's. 

It's a manual process. That's the only thing I don't like about it. We have to go through the process and see if maybe something has not been done right. We have hired a third-party consultant to implement it and rebuild it all now, so that's something we are going to go through and see. Maybe it's not done right. Maybe there is another way around it. We'll have to figure out what happened with the initial implementation and see if we can streamline it to make it easier to use.

What about the implementation team?

We used consultants that are only starting to hand over the solution to our team now. They finished their portion of the work in December. We would have preferred to be more involved as it's only just now that we've realized how manual the solution actually is, and how little we can automate based on our company.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing is okay. It's not too expensive. That said, I'm not completely familiar with the licensing model.

What other advice do I have?

We're just customers. We aren't partners of Cloudability.

We're using the latest version of the solution, as far as I know.

We're still in the initial phase, however, we're finding, overall that it works well. If you're looking into multi-cloud functionality, definitely go for it. If you're sticking with the one cloud, for example, if your organization is just using Azure, it may be better to use a tool dedicated to that. Cloudability would also work fine in that instance, however. If your organization isn't too complex, you may be able to piece together everything with what's there.

I would rate the solution at a six out of ten.

The reason is mainly due to my own limited knowledge or exposure to the product so far. As I said, the process is manual. I don't have a tool for it. It is maybe how we've addressed it so far. Once we dig deep into it, we'll come to know a bit more about if maybe Cloudability can grab the data directly from Azure. We need not move beyond this manual processing. Maybe the reason is due to the complexity of our own organization. Once that is addressed, the tool is going to work really well.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Get our free report covering Amazon, VMware, Cloudability, and other competitors of Azure Cost Management. Updated: January 2022.
565,689 professionals have used our research since 2012.