Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Cisco CloudCenter 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 Cisco CloudCenter and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Migration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic report (Updated: September 2022).
634,775 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
"Its ability to quickly inventory our resources, figure out interdependencies across them, and assemble a topology of your environment is brilliant. There is a price associated with it. Whenever you target a NetApp environment, it is included in the price but whenever you want to add different vendors, like VMware and Cisco, the price greatly spikes. Inventorization helps us a lot to visualize the environment.""Cloud Secure is definitely the most valuable feature and being able to see file level activity. It gives real-time alerting on possible ransomware attacks and provides file security review. It helps us to see if something abnormal is happening on the system before it's too late."

More NetApp Cloud Insights Pros →

"You can scale it easily.""I can define all components and create a blueprint for consumption across all services.""Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very well."

More Cisco CloudCenter Pros →

"The solution has a good optimization feature.""The automated memory balancing, where it looks at whether it's being used in the most efficient way and adds or takes away memory, is the best part. If it didn't do that, it would be something that I would have to do. We have too many machines for one person to do that. The automation helps me in that it is done in a really efficient way and a balanced way because of the policies. It really helps.""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.""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.""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.""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.'""I have the ability to automate things similar to the Orchestrator stuff. I do have the ability to have it do some balancing, and if it sees some different performance metrics that I've set not being met, it'll actually move some of my virtual machines from, let's say, one host to another. It is sort of an automation tool that helps me. Basically, I specify the metric, and if I get a certain host or something being over-utilized, it'll automatically move the virtual machines around for me. It basically has to snap into my vCenter and then it can make adjustments and move my virtual machines around. It also has some very nice reporting tools built around virtual machines. It tells you how much storage, memory, or CPU is being used monthly, and then it gives you a very nice way to be able to send out billing structure to your end users who use servers within your environment."

More IBM Turbonomic Pros →

Cons
"Their pricing model needs improvement.""In a perfect world we would have something built, right out-of-the-box, that can identify what we call "noise," and reduce the amount of data. You're presented with so much data when you first start the data collectors. For example, it brings back a lot of change rates that happen just because of standard computing, like profile changes and that sort of thing. Being able to identify things like that and categorize them and strip it down—and it probably can do that, I just haven't gotten there yet—would be very beneficial."

More NetApp Cloud Insights Cons →

"For many clients, the main problem with the solution is the price. Cisco is very expensive. If they could somehow make the pricing more competitive, that would be a big draw.""They can add some of those features to make the platform more usable for different backgrounds and developer skills.""Improvements are needed in UI and multi-tenancy for this solution."

More Cisco CloudCenter Cons →

"After running this solution in production for a year, we may want a more granular approach to how we utilize the product because we are planning to use some of its metrics to feed into our financial system.""It would be nice for them to have a way to do something with physical machines, but I know that is not their strength Thankfully, the majority of our environment is virtual, but it would be nice to see this type of technology across some other platforms. It would be nice to have capacity planning across physical machines.""In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings.""I would love to see Turbonomic analyze backup data. We have had people in the past put servers into daily full backups with seven-year retention and where the disk size is two terabytes. So, every single day, there is a two terabyte snapshot put into a Blob somewhere. I would love to see Turbonomic say, "Here are all your backups along with the age of them," to help us manage the savings by not having us spend so much on the storage in Azure. That would be huge.""Some features are only available via changes to the deployment YAML, and it would be better to have them in the UI.""They could add a few more reports. They could also be a bit more granular. While they have reports, sometimes it is hard to figure out what you are looking for just by looking at the date.""Recovering resources when they're not needed is not as optimized as it could be.""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."

More IBM Turbonomic Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "Be aware of the capacity licensing and understand how that works, because it is based on capacity. Getting an understanding of that is the biggest thing."
  • More NetApp Cloud Insights Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
  • "If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."
  • "It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."
  • "I'm not involved in any of the billing, but my understanding is that is fairly expensive."
  • "We see ROI in extended support agreements (ESA) for old software. Migration activities seem to be where Turbonomic has really benefited us the most. It's one click and done. We have new machines ready to go with Turbonomic, which are properly sized instead of somebody sitting there with a spreadsheet and guessing. So, my return on investment would certainly be on currency, from a software and hardware perspective."
  • "When we have expanded our licensing, it has always been easy to make an ROI-based decision. So, it's reasonably priced. We would like to have it cheaper, but we get more benefit from it than we pay for it. At the end of the day, that's all you can hope for."
  • "I know there have been some issues with the billing, when the numbers were first proposed, as to how much we would save. There was a huge miscommunication on our part. Turbonomic was led to believe that we could optimize our AWS footprint, because we didn't know we couldn't. So, we were promised savings of $750,000. Then, when we came to implement Turbonomic, the developers in AWS said, "Absolutely not. You're not putting that in our environment. We can't scale down anything because they coded it." Our AWS environment is a legacy environment. It has all these old applications, where all the developers who have made it are no longer with the company. Those applications generate a ton of money for us. So, if one breaks, we are really in trouble and they didn't want to have to deal with an environment that was changing and couldn't be supported. That number went from $750,000 to about $450,000. However, that wasn't Turbonomic's fault."
  • "It is an endpoint type license, which is fine. It is not overly expensive."
  • "The pricing and licensing are fair. We purchase based on benchmark pricing, which we have been able to get. There are no surprise charges nor hidden fees."
  • More IBM Turbonomic Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Migration solutions are best for your needs.
    634,775 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Cloud Secure is definitely the most valuable feature and being able to see file level activity. It gives real-time… more »
    Top Answer:Be aware of the capacity licensing and understand how that works, because it is based on capacity. Getting an… more »
    Top Answer:As I went through learning the querying, it could have been a little more intuitive. I'm still fresh into the system. In… more »
    Top Answer:Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very… more »
    Top Answer:Due to the branding reputation and field experience, the customers in our country are very confident about the Cisco… more »
    Top Answer:We're an implementor, and therefore we deploy this solution for our clients. As a use case example, one client is a… more »
    Top Answer:In terms of pricing and licensing, I wasn't involved too much in that portion. In terms of the licensing, I would say… more »
    Top Answer:The way it handles updates needs to be improved. That would be one of the areas I would focus on. I wish that the… more »
    Top Answer:The product is looking at things in the cloud or in Azure and it gives us reports of things that it could possibly do in… more »
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    CliQr, CliQr CloudCenter
    Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
    Learn More
    Overview

    NetApp Cloud Insights is an infrastructure monitoring tool that gives you visibility into your complete infrastructure. With Cloud Insights, you can monitor, troubleshoot and optimize all your resources including your public clouds and your private data centers.

    The Cisco CloudCenter solution is an application-centric hybrid cloud management platform that securely provisions infrastructure resources and deploys applications to data center, private cloud, and public cloud environments.

    With Cisco CloudCenter breakthrough application-centric technology, users
    can:

    • Model: Quickly and easily build a cloud-independent application profile that defines the deployment and management requirements of an entire application stack.
    • Deploy: Use one click to deploy the application profile and related components and data to any data center or cloud environment.
    • Manage: Apply a wide range of application lifecycle actions to set policies to enable in-place scaling, support cross-environment bursting or high availability and disaster recovery, and stop the deployment.

    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



    Offer
    Remotely Monitor and Optimize Your IT Operations

    Monitor and optimize all your organization's infrastructure even while working from home. Sign up for the 30-day trial to see how NetApp Cloud Insights helps to maintain availability, optimize cloud spend, and identify data security threats.

    Learn more about Cisco CloudCenter
    Learn more about IBM Turbonomic
    Sample Customers
    Information Not Available
    NTT, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), CollabNet, Pratt & Miller, PZFlex
    J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmerica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company23%
    Comms Service Provider9%
    Government8%
    Financial Services Firm7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Comms Service Provider34%
    Computer Software Company21%
    Government5%
    Financial Services Firm5%
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Manufacturing Company12%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise64%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise7%
    Large Enterprise78%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise24%
    Large Enterprise58%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise67%
    Buyer's Guide
    Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic
    September 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: September 2022.
    634,775 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Cisco CloudCenter is ranked 7th in Cloud Migration with 3 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 2nd in Cloud Migration with 21 reviews. Cisco CloudCenter is rated 8.0, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Cisco CloudCenter writes "Easy-to-deploy and supports Amazon Azure, GCP and vSphere, but improvements are needed in UI". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "Helps us optimize cloud operations, reducing our cloud costs". Cisco CloudCenter is most compared with Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Automation, VMware Aria Operations and Morpheus, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, CloudHealth, Cisco Intersight and BMC Helix Cloud Security. See our Cisco CloudCenter vs. IBM Turbonomic report.

    See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors and best Cloud Management vendors.

    We monitor all Cloud Migration 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.