Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

3CX Live Chat vs ON24 Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 3, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

3CX Live Chat
Ranking in Virtual Meetings
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
55
Ranking in other categories
IP PBX (1st), Unified Communications (2nd), Live Chat (4th), Hosted and Cloud Based VoIP (3rd)
ON24 Platform
Ranking in Virtual Meetings
26th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Virtual Events Platforms (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Virtual Meetings category, the mindshare of 3CX Live Chat is 2.3%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ON24 Platform is 1.4%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Virtual Meetings Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
3CX Live Chat2.3%
ON24 Platform1.4%
Other96.3%
Virtual Meetings
 

Featured Reviews

Ahmed ACHOUR - PeerSpot reviewer
General Manager at Beyond IT Services
Enhanced service desk workflow which streamlines operations and offers strong integration capabilities
The customers use 3CX for IP telephony and call center activities. Additionally, they use 3CX for service desk activities, including integration with other ITSM products to collect data from customers who need technical support on their platforms 3CX has proven to be a good solution, particularly…
reviewer1337886 - PeerSpot reviewer
Multimedia Production Manager at a legal firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Easy setup and an a la carte pricing model
The solution needs a more modern interface. One of our biggest complaints is that we don't have the ability to dynamically push our interface to participants. Adobe Connect is an older technology, but it allows us to push our own layout and design to participants. One of the solution's strengths is that it's web-only but that is also a weakness. It is not a software solution but is browser-based which has its advantages and disadvantages. Zoom has become such a force that its ease of use surpasses ON24.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"With the reporting feature you can get all the incoming and outgoing call details."
"The most valuable features of 3CX Live Chat are the ability to go straight to a call or screen-sharing and creating multiple channels from the same chat widget effectively. The ability to raise a call straight out to the cloud is fantastic, it is really useful. Additionally, it integrates very well with WordPress."
"The solution is stable."
"Easy management console access through web browsers with a good interface to Outlook and multiple CRM systems."
"We have not had any bugs or glitches, the solution is stable."
"3CX has strong reporting and management features. You can manage the capabilities of a call center with queues and timers. It's a complete solution."
"It lets you see how many calls you made, the time you called, and how many minutes you spent on the phone."
"The integration with SMS has been helpful. That's how a lot of customers prefer to communicate nowadays. It makes it convenient for the customer to reach us."
"Friendly user interface and simple navigation."
"The solution works well with third-party integrations."
 

Cons

"Once we establish the system and do the initial configuration, some configurations will be fixed. However, if we need to change those configurations, the option is to do a reinstallation. Otherwise, we cannot do anything."
"It needs the option for the CS rep to stop recording when a credit card number is recited by the customer."
"Having a video call would be a nice idea."
"The reporting and dashboards of 3CX could be improved."
"It could be better in terms of providing more options for call recording."
"In 3CX, customization is not as easy as I would like. With 3CX Call Flow Designer, you can set up the flow of a call, deliver it to the department, and automate the process. I can't do many things with this."
"Its features for scheduling and generating reports need improvement."
"You cannot make a group call on 3CX. That feature would make my life easier because I could talk to two suppliers or a supplier and management together. I wouldn't need to end the call and call another person."
"The solution needs a more modern interface."
"Bandwidth optimization could be increased."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There aren't any additional costs. With the license I purchased, I have all features that I need. I don't have to buy an add-on or another license."
"The price of the solution has been reasonable. We have not had any problems or complaints with the licensing model. We have not reached a point where we need to upgrade. We have all the correct channels."
"The price of the solution is in the middle range compared to other solutions. There are different license options available. For example, there is a professional version and an enterprise version, and with the enterprise version, you have the ability to modify the dashboards. You can purchase a license at many different time frame increments, such as monthly, yearly, or two years."
"Switching from POTS or PRI to SIP Trunk save the customer real costs. ROI is seen in less than a year."
"The price of the solution is reasonable. There are a few license options and we are using an enterprise license."
"There is no add-on costing on the standard fees."
"3CX sells an annual subscription, but we usually split it out monthly for clients, so they don't see an annual bill for the 3CX licensing, it's just part of their monthly phone bill. As they're paying us for carrier service anyway, we just roll it all together. Your standard phone service would be an additional cost, you either need to maintain a local carrier with POTS lines or PRI or a SIP, or you have to go with a cloud-based SIP."
"We have purchased an annual license to use 3CX Live Chat. There are different options available, you can pay monthly or yearly. I am completely satisfied with the pricing of 3CX Live Chat, it is cheaper than competitors and it is a better solution."
"We paid $1,800 for five webinars, which is the standard fee. If you require support there is a $300 additional fee, extra attendees is an additional fee, integration is an additional fee, etc. All these extras could add on another $2,500 which was not in our budget."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Virtual Meetings solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Media Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise2
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for 3CX Live Chat?
The pricing of 3CX is around six out of ten. For some customers, the first year may be free of charge, allowing them to try the solution before deciding to implement it.
What needs improvement with 3CX Live Chat?
The reporting and dashboards of 3CX could be improved.
What is your primary use case for 3CX Live Chat?
The customers use 3CX for IP telephony and call center activities. Additionally, they use 3CX for service desk activities, including integration with other ITSM products to collect data from custom...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

3CX PBX
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
IBM, Zendesk, Salesforce, Linkedin, Intel
Find out what your peers are saying about 3CX Live Chat vs. ON24 Platform and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.