We performed a comparison between Broadcom DX Application Performance Management and Datadog based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Broadcom DX Application Performance Management offers a configuration and manager tool, code-level visibility, transaction monitoring, and a light model for monitoring servers. Datadog provides valuable features like dashboards and reporting, error reporting and log centralization, ease of use and setup, and a wide range of integrations. It also offers flexibility, observability, and the ability to search across logs from various microservices.
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management could benefit from enhancements in integration, front-end performance, support services, support for current technologies, and user experience monitoring. Datadog requires improvements in usability, integration, agent deployment, documentation, log reporting, dashboard loading time, advanced querying, and tutorials.
Service and Support: Broadcom DX Application Performance Management has faced criticism for its technical support, leaving customers unsatisfied and wanting greater assistance. Datadog's customer service and support have garnered varying feedback, with some users finding it helpful and responsive, while others have encountered unresponsive support in specific areas.
Ease of Deployment: Users had mixed experiences with the initial setup of Broadcom, with some finding it quick and simple while others found it to be a lengthier process. The initial setup of Datadog is generally regarded as uncomplicated, with some users even receiving help during the setup.
Pricing: Broadcom DX Application Performance Management has a setup cost based on a monthly licensing fee. Users recommend implementing limits on deploying the agent and pricing based on memory or CPU usage. Datadog's pricing and licensing experience differ among users. Some find it expensive while others find it reasonable compared to other solutions. Certain features can become expensive, leading to confusion with the pricing model.
Comparison Results: Datadog is the preferred choice over Broadcom DX Application Performance Management. It stands out for its easy setup, user-friendly interface, and valuable features like dashboards, error reporting, and log centralization. Users find it efficient, flexible, and highly useful for monitoring and troubleshooting.
"It is very useful and helpful with the analysis of historical performance data."
"The configuration and the manager tool are good features."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is its user interface."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...there is a very easy way to deal with it by adding more servers to the application."
"We did the setup for a new datacenter, and that was pretty straightforward."
"The ability to accomplish the identification of the root cause of problems with applications in drill-down level by integrating the suite with tools for managing and monitoring."
"The features that I find most valuable are related to network monitoring."
"The insight it gives into the applications that it's actually applied to, and the flexibility to do many things with those metrics, and also feed your own metrics from external sources."
"Its integration definitely stands out. It provides seamless monitoring of all our systems, services, apps, and whatever else we secure and monitor. Visualizations have become simpler with dashboards. We are getting visibility into systems, services, and apps stack through a single pane of glass, which is good. We are able to put logs in context."
"The ability to send notifications based on metadata from the monitor is helpful."
"It is easy to implement and scale applications with standardized visibility, monitoring and alerting"
"Even if we don't end up using Datadog, it revealed problems and optimizations to us that weren't obvious before."
"They have a very good foundation in capturing metrics, logs, and traces. It's a very nice tool for that and it allows you to apply these monitoring tools in almost any technology."
"It lets us react more quickly to things going wrong. Whereas before, it might have been 30 minutes to an hour before we noticed something going on, we will know within a minute or two if something is off, which will let us essentially get something back up and running faster for our customers, which is revenue."
"It is great that creating an incident is possible from Slack while having all the relevant data in Datadog."
"The most valuable feature I have found is the elastic container service."
"Needs the ability to dynamically create dashboards. Right now, we do custom dashboards. Everything is created manually."
"The reports are a key part of APM in my vision because it is through them that we manage to generate the evidence to direct the development team and operational support to address. However, we can not extract the information of the tool through reports. We have needed several times to use screen print screen, CTRL + C and CTRL + V."
"Lacks some integration between all the tools."
"The solution still needs the administrator of APM to know a lot more to configure and control everything. So it's a headache for the administrator to do the daily jobs."
"There is no auto flow diagram, and the alert mechanism is not as good when compared to other tools."
"Dashboards need to be improved in order to make them self-explanatory."
"Technical support needs to be more responsive and address support tickets more quickly."
"They need to add support for new frameworks, or at least provide a broader guide/perspectives to add them to monitoring specific agents to retrieve metrics with thresholds as a reference to guide the customer as to where they must go to achieve this."
"I find the training great. That said, it is set for the LCD (lowest common denominator). Of course, this is very helpful to sell the product, yet, to really utilize the product, you need to get more detailed."
"The incident management beta looks promising, but it is still missing the ability to automatically create incidents based on certain alerts."
"Datadog could make their use cases more visible either through their docs or tutorial videos."
"We primarily use the log management functionality, and the only feedback I have there is better fuzzy text searching in logs (the kind that Kibana has)."
"I would like better navigability across pages."
"I found the solution to be stable, I did not experience any bugs or glitches. However, some of the managing team did."
"Datadog could have a better business analysis module."
"If there were a more cost-effective manner of deploying the tool, we'd be more likely to adopt it more widely."
More Broadcom DX Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is ranked 25th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 161 reviews while Datadog is ranked 1st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 137 reviews. Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is rated 8.0, while Datadog is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management writes "Provides efficiency in migration and DAW but requires a high level of administrator knowledge for configuration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, BMC TrueSight Operations Management and New Relic, whereas Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and AppDynamics. See our Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs. Datadog report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.
