We performed a comparison between Checkmk and Cisco Intersight based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of the solution is that it has a lot of different pieces, and they all work together...It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"The most valuable features of Checkmk are its resource monitoring, infra monitoring, and log factor configuration."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"We enjoy having an inside view of all the data centers and all the EdgeX nodes within a single portal rather than going into the EdgeX connections one by one."
"The tool helps to manage Cisco servers."
"I like Intersight because of the integration with HashiCorp, Kubernetes, and each cloud because Intersight is the IO module."
"Provides an overall view using a single portal."
"What I like most about Cisco Intersight is its manageability."
"Cisco Intersight has valuable features for workflow automation and inventory administration."
"Intersight can validate our environment."
"The product has good integration."
"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"If an alert is generated for a specific pattern in the log, and if Checkmk catches that log, it will stay there even after the alert is resolved."
"Sometimes we receive alerts, and it can become annoying when you acknowledge an alert. It is very clunky when you acknowledge the alert. The process is not very intuitive, and there are instances where it feels a bit cumbersome to acknowledge an alert."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The usability must be better."
"When new features are added, the service becomes full of bugs."
"The unique problem with Cisco Intersight is that it's not supporting some players."
"The solution needs some enhancement in order to build the cluster in two nodes."
"It's a very complex solution."
"The product's setup should be easier."
"Cisco Intersight needs some improvement in terms of stability. Hybrid cloud management and proper hyperscaler tie-up are other areas for improvement."
"An area for improvement in Cisco Intersight is automation. It needs more automation capabilities. Apart from enhanced automation, I want Cisco Intersight to integrate with third-party monitoring tools in its next release."
Checkmk is ranked 20th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 6 reviews while Cisco Intersight is ranked 26th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 10 reviews. Checkmk is rated 8.6, while Cisco Intersight is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Checkmk writes "A reasonably priced tool for system and application monitoring". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Intersight writes "Scalable and easy to set up portfolio of services; good for remote device management and other functions". Checkmk is most compared with Zabbix, Icinga, Netdata, Centreon and Observium, whereas Cisco Intersight is most compared with Cisco UCS Manager, HPE OneView, IBM Turbonomic, Cisco UCS Director and VMware Aria Automation. See our Checkmk vs. Cisco Intersight report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
