Azure Cost Management vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Azure Cost Management and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Cost Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Azure Cost Management vs. IBM Turbonomic Report (Updated: January 2023).
672,411 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Our customers use it and like it.""The most valuable feature is that our customers can see their consumption in real time. Even though we have a couple of analytics provided by our company, those are not in real time.""Azure Cost Management helps us analyze the data on service usage and decide how to go ahead with the recommendations. You can automate it by writing custom automation scripts.""The cost analysis and exportability are the most valuable features of the solution.""What I like the most about Azure Cost Management is that it's similar to a native service, and it has very well-defined product features, particularly if a customer is moving to Azure, then it gives proper insight in terms of compatibility and what benefits a customer can get from the solution.""I like the granularity of the tools.""It is easy to log in, and everything is graphical so that you can build on the published resources.""The best thing about Azure Cost Management is the cost analysis functionality because it provides regular alerts."

More Azure Cost Management Pros →

"We can manage multiple environments using a single pane of glass, which is something that I really like.""Using this product helps us to reduce performance risk because it shows us where resources are needed but not yet allocated.""We've saved hundreds of hours. Most of the time those hours would have to be after hours as well, which are more valuable to me as that's my personal time.""The solution has a good optimization feature.""The most valuable features are the cluster utilization reports and the resource capacity planning. We can simulate how much capacity we can add to the current resources. The individual DM reports and VM-facing recommendations report are also helpful.""Turbonomic can show us if we're not using some of our storage volumes efficiently in AWS. For example, if we've over-provisioned one of our virtual machines to have dedicated IOPs that it doesn't need, Turbonomic will detect that and tell us.""The feature for optimizing VMs is the most valuable because a number of the agencies have workloads or VMs that are not really being used. Turbonomic enables us to say, 'If you combine these, or if you decide to go with a reserve instance, you will save this much.'""With Turbonomic, we were able to reduce our ESX cluster size and save money on our maintenance and license renewals. It saved us around $75,000 per year but it's a one-time reduction in VMware licensing. We don't renew the support. The ongoing savings is probably $50,000 to $75,000 a year, but there was a one-time of $200,000 plus."

More IBM Turbonomic Pros →

Cons
"It can be difficult to determine the cost associated with certain resources as it relies on a tagging progress. This means we need to drill down billing reports to highlight and fix missing tags.""We lack a resource and ID login.""The built-in reports from Azure Cost Management aren't intelligent. It will estimate where you could potentially save money, but it's not like Turbonomic, which has a smart engine. It is dynamically managing and automating the transition to the right cost model. It's a dynamic cost management module.""We would like to see more flexibility added to this solution, such as being able to compare reservations, or compare costs across multiple financial years and report on the reasons for deviation in spend.""I would like to have added to Azure Cost Management, drill down features from within the cost analysis reporting.""I would like to see some features included for costing and more information about the components of deployment. Sometimes, it's very difficult to match the component with the solution because the descriptions are not very clear.""I haven't detected anything that needs improvement, but any solution could be improved.""Cost Management could always provide more details. The more information, the better. They just need to build on what they have now."

More Azure Cost Management Cons →

"There is an opportunity for improvement with some of Turbonomic's permissions internally for role-based access control. We would like the ability to come up with some customized permissions or scope permissions a bit differently than the product provides.""The deployment process is a little tricky. It wasn't hard for me because I have pretty in-depth knowledge of Kubernetes, and their software runs on Kubernetes. To deploy it or upgrade it, you have to be able to follow steps and use the Kubernetes command line, or you'll need someone to come in and do it for you.""Additional interfaces would be helpful.""The GUI and policy creation have room for improvement. There should be a better view of some of the numbers that are provided and easier to access. And policy creation should have it easier to identify groups.""The management interface seems to be designed for high-resolution screens. Somebody with a smaller-resolution screen might not like the web interface. I run a 4K monitor on it, so everything fits on the screen. With a lower resolution like 1080, you need to scroll a lot. Everything is in smaller windows. It doesn't seem to be designed for smaller screens.""Some features are only available via changes to the deployment YAML, and it would be better to have them in the UI.""The reporting needs to be improved. It's important for us to know and be able to look back on what happened and why certain decisions were made, and we want to use a custom report for this.""They have a long road map when we ask for certain things that will make the product better. It takes time, but that's understandable because there are other things that are higher on the priority list."

More IBM Turbonomic Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The solution is free. It's part of having an Azure subscription."
  • "I give the solution's overall cost an eight out of ten."
  • More Azure Cost Management Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The product is fairly priced right now. Given its capabilities, it is excellently priced. We think that the product will become self-funding because we will be able to maximize our resources, which will help us from a capacity perspective. That should save us money in the long run."
  • "It's worth the time and money investment if you can afford it."
  • "The pricing is in line with the other solutions that we have. It's not a bargain software, nor is it overly expensive."
  • "I don't know the current prices, but I like how the licensing is based on the number of instances instead of sockets, clusters, or cores. We have some VMs that are so heavy I can only fit four on one server. It's not cost-effective if we have to pay more for those. When I move around a VM SQL box with 30 cores and a half-terabyte of RAM, I'm not paying for an entire socket and cores where people assume you have at least 10 or 20 VMs on that socket for that pricing."
  • "In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."
  • More IBM Turbonomic Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Cost Management solutions are best for your needs.
    672,411 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:We don't actually use the Azure Cost Management features. We have our own capabilities. We put our own technology on top of Azure as Azure doesn't deliver a really good cost optimization, so our… more »
    Top Answer:Based on the transitional cost we charge, it's not expensive, but could be better.
    Top Answer:The policy-based remediation is probably the biggest area where Azure is lacking and that's why we sell a lot of our technology to our customers. We don't really use the Azure tools that much. We look… more »
    Top Answer:I don't know the current prices, but I like how the licensing is based on the number of instances instead of sockets, clusters, or cores. We have some VMs that are so heavy I can only fit four on one… more »
    Top Answer:The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are… more »
    Top Answer:I belong to the on-premises team. We're a telecom company with a private and public cloud, but we don't use Turbonomic for the cloud infrastructure. We use Turbonomic for capacity forecasting and… more »
    Ranking
    4th
    Views
    3,684
    Comparisons
    3,189
    Reviews
    8
    Average Words per Review
    350
    Rating
    8.0
    1st
    Views
    10,061
    Comparisons
    5,053
    Reviews
    13
    Average Words per Review
    1,800
    Rating
    8.8
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Microsoft Azure Cost Management, Cloudyn
    Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
    Learn More
    Overview

    Azure Cost Management empowers organizations to monitor cloud spend, drive organizational accountabilities, and optimize cloud efficiency so they can accelerate future cloud investments with confidence.

    IBM Turbonomic Application Resource Management (ARM) software is used by customers to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications across hybrid and multicloud environments. Turbonomic customers report an average 33% reduction in cloud and infrastructure waste without impacting application performance, and return-on-investment of 471% over three years.

    For further information, please visit www.ibm.com/cloud/turbonomic

    Ready to take a closer look? Request a demo today.

    Offer
    Learn more about Azure Cost Management
    Learn more about IBM Turbonomic
    Sample Customers
    Quixey, Infomedia, Panaya, Wix.com, Mirabeau, Mi9, GetTaxi, Outsmart Studios, Bownty, BlazeMeter: The Load Testing Cloud, Irdeto, Effective Measure, Totango, Nextdoor, BranchOut, The BioTeam, Evolven, Netotiate, ClickSoftware
    J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmerica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company50%
    Government13%
    Real Estate/Law Firm13%
    Pharma/Biotech Company13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company23%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Comms Service Provider10%
    Retailer6%
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Manufacturing Company12%
    Insurance Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Comms Service Provider11%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise71%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business23%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise63%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise24%
    Large Enterprise59%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise67%
    Buyer's Guide
    Azure Cost Management vs. IBM Turbonomic
    January 2023
    Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Cost Management vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: January 2023.
    672,411 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Azure Cost Management is ranked 4th in Cloud Cost Management with 9 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 1st in Cloud Cost Management with 14 reviews. Azure Cost Management is rated 8.2, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure Cost Management writes "It helps us analyze the data on service usage and optimize spending, but it could use more automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "Provides recommendations whether workloads should be scaled up or down". Azure Cost Management is most compared with AWS Savings Plans, CloudHealth, Datadog, Cloudability and Amazon CloudWatch, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, CloudHealth, Cisco Intersight, Densify and VMware vSphere. See our Azure Cost Management vs. IBM Turbonomic report.

    See our list of best Cloud Cost Management vendors.

    We monitor all Cloud Cost Management 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.