We performed a comparison between Chef and TeamCity based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Build Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is automation."
"The most valuable feature is the language that it uses: Ruby."
"The product is useful for automating processes."
"Manual deployments came to a halt completely. Server provisioning became lightning fast. Chef-docker enabled us to have fewer sets of source code for different purposes. Configuration management was a breeze and all the servers were as good as immutable servers."
"It is a well thought out product which integrates well with what developers and customers are looking for."
"Automation is everything. Having so many servers in production, many of our processes won't work nor scale. So, we look for tools to help us automate the process, and Chef is one of them."
"This solution has improved my organization in the way that deployment has become very quick and orchestration is easy. If we have thousands of servers we can easily deploy in a small amount of time. We can deploy the applications or any kind of announcements in much less time."
"The scalability of the product is quite nice."
"The flexibility of TeamCity allows it to fit in workflows that I have yet to imagine."
"It provides repeatable CI/CD throughout our company with lots of feedback on failures and successes to the intended audiences via email and Slack."
"It's easy to move to a new release because of templates and meta-runners, and agent pooling."
"Good integration with IDE and JetBrains products."
"Time to deployment has been reduced in situations where we want to deploy to production or deploy breaking changes."
"TeamCity's GUI is nice."
"One of the most beneficial features for us is the flexibility it offers in creating deployment steps tailored to different technologies."
"Using TeamCity and emailing everyone on fail is one way to emphasize the importance of testing code and showing management why taking the time to test actually does saves time from having to fix bugs on the other end."
"The solution could improve in managing role-based access. This would be helpful."
"Chef could get better by being more widely available, adapting to different needs, and providing better documentation."
"I would like them to add database specific items, configuration items, and migration tools. Not necessarily on the builder side or the actual setup of the system, but more of a migration package for your different database sets, such as MongoDB, your extenders, etc. I want to see how that would function with a transition out to AWS for Aurora services and any of the RDBMS packages."
"The AWS monitoring, AWS X-Ray, and some other features could be improved."
"They could provide more features, so the recipes could be developed in a simpler and faster way. There is still a lot of room for improvement, providing better functionalities when creating recipes."
"In the future, Chef could develop a docker container or docker images."
"I would also like to see more analytics and reporting features. Currently, the analytics and reporting features are limited. I'll have to start building my own custom solution with Power BI or Tableau or something like that. If it came with built-in analytics and reporting features that would be great."
"The time that it takes in terms of integration. Cloud integration is comparatively easy, but when it comes to two-link based integrations - like trying to integrate it with any monitoring tools, or maybe some other ticketing tools - it takes longer. That is because most of the out-of-the-box integration of the APIs needs some revisiting."
"Integrating with certain technologies posed challenges related to time and required support from the respective technology teams to ensure smooth integration with TeamCity."
"If TeamCity could create more out of the box solutions to make it more user friendly and create more use cases, that would be ideal."
"The UI for this solution could be improved. New users don't find it easy to navigate. The need some level of training to understand the ins and the outs."
"We've called TeamCity tech support. Unfortunately, all their tech support is based in Europe, so we end up with such a big time crunch that I now need to have one person in the US."
"Their online documentation is fairly extensive, but sometimes you can end up navigating in circles to find answers. I would like them (or partner with someone) to provide training classes to help newcomers get things up and running more quickly."
"If there was more documentation that was easier to locate, it would be helpful for users."
"Last time I used it, dotnet compilation had to be done via PowerShell scripts. There was actually a lot that had to be scripted."
"REST API support lacks many features in customization of builds, jobs, and settings."
Chef is ranked 15th in Build Automation with 18 reviews while TeamCity is ranked 6th in Build Automation with 25 reviews. Chef is rated 8.0, while TeamCity is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Chef writes "Useful for large infrastructure, reliable, but steep learning cureve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TeamCity writes "Build management system used to successfully create full request tests and run security scans". Chef is most compared with Jenkins, AWS Systems Manager, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Microsoft Configuration Manager and SaltStack, whereas TeamCity is most compared with GitLab, CircleCI, Jenkins, Harness and Tekton. See our Chef vs. TeamCity report.
See our list of best Build Automation vendors.
We monitor all Build Automation 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.