No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Azure Monitor vs OmniPeek comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

Azure Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
13th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (8th)
OmniPeek
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
38th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (49th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Azure Monitor is 2.0%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OmniPeek is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Monitor2.0%
OmniPeek0.7%
Other97.3%
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Andy Rabern - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Telemetry insights have improved how I track user behavior and application performance daily
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it does well. My perspective is more based on an Application Insights agent running on a service or an app service and sending the telemetry via the agent, and also doing the filtering of telemetry at the agent level so you are not having a ton of telemetry. I believe Azure Monitor does pretty much the same thing. I have also used tools such as New Relic, and New Relic is a much more robust tool, but that is a different product and you are going to pay for that. It is a different offering altogether. The subscription that we had at the time allowed for a couple gigabytes of telemetry during the month, and I believe that telemetry only lives for about two months. You have to experiment with it to see how much you want to pay. I was not really involved in the pricing. It was more along the lines of we were running up against our limits in terms of the amount of free telemetry or telemetry that we get with our subscription, and so we either needed to scale back or turn specific telemetry types off or do some more sampling. It is nice that those capabilities are there so that you can reduce the amount of telemetry. I cannot really speak to pricing but I do believe that it is somewhat reasonable for Azure Monitor. New Relic is pretty expensive, I believe.
Vinal-Patel - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Architect, internally known as Network Transformation Lead at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees
Real-time analytics and alerts improve application performance and network operations
OmniPeek's ability to convert application visibility into flow helps me quickly understand application performance over LAN, WAN, or wireless. Its real-time analytics, integrated with LiveNX, allow me to monitor business-critical applications and set up alerts for application performance issues. This centralized dashboard and alert system is highly valuable for maintaining network operations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution very easily integrates with Azure services and in one click you can monitor your resource."
"Azure Monitor has helped our organization to have insights into issues and informs us before an issue becomes a very critical stage."
"The most valuable feature is that it ensures our servers are up."
"The most valuable features of Azure Monitor are the login analytics workspace and we can write any kind of custom queries in order to receive the data that is inserted into the login analytics workspace, diagnostic settings, et cetera."
"The product is very good for developers who want to integrate with Visual Studio."
"What I like about Azure Monitor is that it performs well."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The tools for logs and metrics are pretty good and easy to use."
"OmniPeek's ability to convert application visibility into flow helps me quickly understand application performance over LAN, WAN, or wireless."
"OmniPeek shows the entire packet flow and structure, particularly in security-related scenarios, whereas Wireshark sometimes fails to capture all packets."
"It's a solid piece of software. It's stable."
"The most valuable feature is OmniPeek is user-friendly."
"OmniPeek is a good product, but you should know its purpose for your organization."
"I believe the most crucial feature of OmniPeek search is the ability to sniff packets based on channel switching."
"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek was the ability it gave us to see the connection procedure."
"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek is the ability to assign custom color codes to the different packets easily."
 

Cons

"They should include advanced logging on the database level in the Azure pool."
"I believe Azure Monitor is already a top-notch solution with excellent functionality and there is not much I would suggest for improvement. However, there is one limitation that certain features require payment, even for testing purposes, which can be a challenge."
"Currently, it seems it's complicated to get the correct information in terms of what to do and how things work."
"I need connectivity with cost management."
"What I feel is when I open a screen of Azure, some places are very complex to navigate to. It is not very user-friendly when it comes to accessing certain sections."
"The product should integrate well with other tools or clouds in the future, as it is one of the areas where the product currently has certain shortcomings."
"In terms of pricing, Azure Monitor's billing based on data size can sometimes lead to increased costs, especially when developers need to purge data frequently. While there are mechanisms in place to track and manage this, there is room for improvement in terms of optimizing data pausing and related processes. Enhancements in this area could help mitigate potential billing concerns and provide a more seamless experience for users."
"The query builder could be better. In comparison to other monitoring tools, in order to use Azure Monitor, your engineers need to have KQL experience. If they don't, it's not intuitive as a system."
"I would like to see the saving feature improved. We have had issues if you do not save your progress then you have to start from the beginning."
"I am not using OmniPeek for automation, we only do manual testing. Automation testing is tedious to do. The automation should be more user-friendly. I have exposed some APIs but the usage is not user-friendly."
"OmniPeek needs to improve its performance level."
"Centralized management of configurations needs improvement."
"Making it more clear on how to configure the filters, or really automating them, would be an improvement."
"I don't see a clear roadmap in the future for improving this software."
"I would like to see the tool work in an open environment the same as how it does in a closed environment."
"The solution's automation has room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its cost depends on the ingestion of the logs. It could go anywhere. For an out-of-the-box platform such as FrameFlow, you pay pretty much a fixed price and you get what you get, whereas, with something like Azure Monitor, you pay by the ingestion charge, so you can have one client who pays hardly anything for the same alerts, and another client pays loads and loads."
"Azure Monitor is one of the more cost effective solutions on the market."
"The solution is a pay-as-you-go consumption service and is the least expensive in the market."
"It is a pay-as-you-go model. I find it very cost-effective."
"Besides standard licensing fees the customer needs to additionally pay based on the ingested data size"
"The product offers a pay-as-you-go model to users. The charges are to be paid according to the usage of the product."
"The cost of Azure Monitor application performance should be less expensive."
"The Azure Insight is a little bit expensive."
"We have only purchased the add-on once and have not paid for any subsequent versions as it was too costly for us."
"The pricing for this solution could be improved, as it is a very expensive product."
"There are different types of licenses available."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
9%
Educational Organization
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
I feel Azure Monitor does a fair job. I do feel it is not a streaming service in my opinion. There are advantages to having stream messaging and logging on that level. But for what it is, I feel it...
What is your primary use case for Azure Monitor?
I am a developer who uses Azure Monitor for telemetry of the applications that I work on. Application Insights is one of those tools, and I have also used other non-Azure products before. Currently...
What needs improvement with OmniPeek?
There isn't anything specific that needs improvement in OmniPeek, as it performs better than Wireshark for our requirements. However, OmniPeek could benefit from supporting different platforms. Pla...
What is your primary use case for OmniPeek?
I have been working with the OmniPeek product for almost two years at the start of my career, primarily using it for wireless 802.11 Wi-Fi packets, sniffer, and analysis. My experience with OmniPee...
What advice do you have for others considering OmniPeek?
I didn't explore much about OmniPeek beyond its basic features. OmniPeek is user-friendly and easy to start working with, especially on the Windows platform. For beginners, it is very easy to handl...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Savvius OmniPeek
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
Apcon, Aruba Networks, Avaya Inc., Cisco Systems, Ekahau, Gigamon Systems, HP, IBM, IXIA, Meru Networks, Napatech, NextComputing, Procera Networks, Qualcomm Atheros, Ralink Technology Corporation, Telchemy
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. OmniPeek and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.