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

Avada Software Infrared360 vs DX Unified Infrastructure Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 6, 2024

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

Avada Software Infrared360
Ranking in Server Monitoring
43rd
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (73rd), Business Activity Monitoring (4th), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (12th)
DX Unified Infrastructure M...
Ranking in Server Monitoring
23rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
120
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (75th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (52nd), Cloud Monitoring Software (40th), AIOps (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Server Monitoring category, the mindshare of Avada Software Infrared360 is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of DX Unified Infrastructure Management is 0.9%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Server Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

WK
Role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems
* We now have the possibility of getting a central perspective on all tenants. * We have defined access roles for developers. Therefore, they can 'read in' their queues on the development and testing stages. With special roles, they may also write. This improves our development and testing cycle. * For operative systems, we have restricted the access. Still, selected people can react if something is happening in the various BOQs.
Mark Tukh - PeerSpot reviewer
Great scalability, versatility, infrastructure coverage and ease of implementation
I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. The number of people needed for deployment depends on the customer, but we usually need at least one person and two to three at other times. The initial implementation takes about two months. The full implementation can be infinite because you may want to implement more. The product does not require a lot of maintenance. To increase the implementation, we push additional services in the first and second years to make it more robust and fully implemented. We usually sell to big enterprises. It can also be affordable for smaller enterprises, but we don't work with them a lot. We have from 2,000 to 10,000 workers. So the product itself can have five, ten or even 20 users.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"
"The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."
"It's what we use for monitoring our MQ system, so the features that they provide are just really, really good."
"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."
"Great customized dashboards and drill down reports with auto serve analytics."
"It is easy to implement."
"Technical support is great."
"Scalability and flexibility. The product can grow with your infrastructure so you don't have to install other products. Just add components. It's very simple."
"The number of probes available. Out of the box, I believe about 200 probes are available. And, if there's a probe that is not available, you can write one. You can also go to the communities and suggest, and based on demand, CA will write one for you."
"The ability to monitor any platform. We have Windows, Linux, AIX, and mainframe all being monitored with the same UIM infrastructure."
"You can scale it pretty much however way you want to as long as you have the servers to throw at it."
"The monitoring of the applications to let our business know when things are performing and that they're up and available."
 

Cons

"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"The UI can be cumbersome - but we are still using the Viper interface and we have not had the time to check out the Alloy interface which is supposed to be much improved."
"One area where they could improve is with their documentation. Some sections are not up to date with new release information and providing additional samples in some areas would be very helpful."
"We are still working with the FTE/MFT subscription monitoring and reporting functionality. That is an area in which we would like to see further development taking place."
"Some of the graphics in the interface could be improved. It's pretty basic. Some interfaces are not up to what you're used to seeing on other, more Windows-like tools."
"​We want to see more investment in the UI and the dashboard."
"The biggest feature that I've been hoping they would enhance on is inventory management: things like adding/removing nodes."
"It is a little complex to use versus other softwares."
"We have experienced challenges with finding a mechanism to deploy the agents, but it's only on the first deployment so it's not a big issue."
"We've had issues with pulling reports."
"It needs a little bit more functionality in the Admin Console."
"Within this product there are individual probes, and each of these probes doesn't always necessarily output the same kind of information into our database. So when we try to collect what's called QoS data, from one probe we might get a ton of information, lots of good stuff that we can use in our database, but then from another probe, we might not get so much or we might not be able to pull the things that we want to."
"There should be wider coverage of storage infrastructure."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Start small, then increase licensing later as per your demand."
"Our internal budget calculation model incorporates the pricing per endpoint for any new projects. However, as our footprint for distributed queue managers shrinks as part of our shared middleware hub deployment, the initial licensing and support costs have been reduced over the last five years."
"Because the licensing is at the QMGR level, you need to have at least a small cushion of licenses for occasional enterprise needs."
"Avada Software's licensing metric is very good because the license fees are based on the number of connections (which have not increased for us very much over the years) rather than the CPU processing power (which increases significantly whenever our hardware is upgraded) or the number of users (which has increased for us a lot since our original purchase)."
"Pricing for DX Unified Infrastructure Management isn't cheap at all. It's a complex tool, so you have to pay more. No one is happy with a large bill to pay, but if it's a complex product and you designed a complex solution to be monitored, it'll be your fault that you need to buy an expensive product, and that would be implicit in the design of DX Unified Infrastructure Management. Monitoring is just a small part of it. Sometimes you have to pay a significant amount of money for a complex yet very good solution."
"This product is expensive compared to other vendors (SolarWinds, ManageEngine)."
"Reasonable setup cost and licensing prices."
"CAD $400,000 annually."
"The product-price ratio is better than other brands such as Fortinet or SonicWall."
"The license cost depends on the number of probes and robots."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Server Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
35%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Printing Company
8%
Performing Arts
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Performing Arts
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your primary use case for DX Infrastructure Manager?
We are an integrating company that offers DX Unified Infrastructure Management to customers. We help them set it up, do the integration, and provide support. Our end customers include financial ins...
What advice do you have for others considering DX Infrastructure Manager?
I would recommend DX Unified Infrastructure Management to others as it is a good and reliable solution. I would rate it nine out of ten due to its robust functionality and capability to support inf...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for DX Infrastructure Manager?
The pricing of DX Unified Infrastructure Management is high and often a concern for customers. The cost is higher compared to other Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), which is feedback we hav...
 

Also Known As

Infrared360
DX Infrastructure Manager, DX Infrastructure Manager for Z Systems and CA UIM for zSystems, CA UIM (DX Infrastructure Manager), CA Nimsoft Monitor, CA UIM, DX Infrastructure Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

USBank, Southwest Airlines, Visiting Nurse Services of New York, Aon Hewitt, Parker Hannifin,  Cantonal Bank of Zurich (ZKB), Hagemeyer NA, and many others
CBNCloud, IIJ Global Singapore, AT&S, AXSOS, Aozora Bank, HCL Technologies, IntelliNet, Securex
Find out what your peers are saying about Avada Software Infrared360 vs. DX Unified Infrastructure Management and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.