Cisco CloudCenter vs VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Turbonomic
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Management
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
204
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (5th), Virtualization Management Tools (2nd), Cloud Analytics (1st), Cloud Cost Management (1st)
Cisco CloudCenter
Ranking in Cloud Management
18th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (10th)
VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth
Ranking in Cloud Management
17th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Cost Management (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Cloud Management category, the mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 6.9%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco CloudCenter is 0.8%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth is 1.9%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Management
Unique Categories:
Cloud Migration
12.9%
Virtualization Management Tools
14.6%
Cloud Cost Management
4.9%
 

Featured Reviews

KM
Aug 17, 2023
It shows you what you should do, but it can also act on recommendations automatically
Our organization uses cloud-based infrastructure, so everything is metered. You're wasting money if you have a system running but you're not using it. Turbonomic can take that system offline or suspend it. It can also adjust resources so that they're optimal for a particular workload. It gives you visibility and also takes action automatically. Turbonomic offers a single platform for optimizing complex, mixed environments. With APM integration, it can tell you how each application is performing and rationalize the resources to ensure the optimal configuration for performance, so there's no waste. It will make those adjustments for you based on application trends. It covers the complete stack all the way up from your UI down to your core host machine if you're running on a VM or the physical machine if you're running on a device. It tries to ensure consistency and hasn't caused any additional overhead on my applications. The automation features are helpful because engineers no longer need to focus on fixing issues. They can spend their time on innovation and more important things. Right now, a lot of the work is still being done manually. When I get alerts, I send a staff member to make adjustments, but I can't do that in real time. It might take days or weeks to address a ticket. The meter is constantly running while we're waiting to fix that so that money is going down the drain. It's hard to quantify how much time we save using Turbonomic, but it's around 20 percent. I only do analysis and remediation on maybe Tuesday and Thursday. It's not about the time that I waste; it's about the time and cost we can recover. I no longer need to wait until Tuesday. If something happens on the weekend, the tool can fix it on Sunday. It does save time, but the bigger aspect is cost savings. The core expense of our setup is cloud costs, so cloud management is a huge piece of our financial operations. We're constantly looking at cloud spending and ways to make that more efficient.
SP
Jul 24, 2022
Easy-to-deploy and supports Amazon Azure, GCP and vSphere, but improvements are needed in UI
Cisco can improve their product by being agnostic, not just specific to Cisco components but also supportive of other vendors. Improvements are needed in UI and multi-tenancy for this solution. We primarily work with Cisco View. Cisco CloudCenter is their own product and they are working with us to create a hybrid cloud solution. Our custom CMP solution will be sold by Cisco as their own solution. I wouldn't say they are doing much research on CloudCenter, but are exploring different CMPs. Cisco acquired CliQr and since then I haven't seen much development on CloudCenter. The solution does not have YAML abstractions that allow you to consume the overall YAML to create a relevant infrastructure. VMware on AWS needs to be supported because native AWS is not useful in hybrid cloud situations. We have a customer who requires a hybrid cloud, so we went toward vRealize Automation. The solution is primarily for private clouds as they don't support much on public clouds. When we discussed this, they didn't have GCP in their portfolio. I'm assuming they have added it now.
Steve Staten - PeerSpot reviewer
Jan 9, 2023
The solution has excellent scalability, great dashboards, and is stable
I use the solution daily, multiple hours a day to identify possible savings by analyzing the various displays as well as the policies for possible cost savings for our customers CloudHelth has helped our organization with trying to right-size virtual machines based on current utilization and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"The ability to monitor and automate both the right-sizing of VMs as well as to automate the vMotion of VMs across ESXi hosts."
"The most valuable features are the cluster utilization reports and the resource capacity planning. We can simulate how much capacity we can add to the current resources. The individual DM reports and VM-facing recommendations report are also helpful."
"The recommendation of the family types is a huge help because it has saved us a lot of money. We use it primarily for that. Another thing that Turbonomic provides us with is a single platform that manages the full application stack and that's something I really like."
"The solution has a good optimization feature."
"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.'"
"The most important feature to us is an objective measurement of VM headroom per cluster. In addition, the ability to check for the right-sizing of VMs."
"My favorite part of the solution is the automation scheduling. Being able to choose when actions happen, and how they happen..."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward if you have a basic setup."
"Upgrades are very simple as well because they've allowed us to get updates directly in the CloudCenter Suite manager. If you need to do an upgrade to your setup afterward, you just push a button and it rolls out the parts and retires the old ones. It's seamless and very simple compared to what we've done before."
"The solution is agile and it has APIs for integration."
"Cisco CloudCenter's scalability is good."
"Cisco has a lot of published information and documentation that helps users understand the product and its offering very well."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"You can scale it easily."
"The solution includes a lot of features and is useful because you can configure all the way down to ports."
"We are able to create an internal price of the product that we can then sell to clients. We get the cost plan at a good discount and then resell it with a mark up to our enterprise-level clients. This flexibility in pricing is one of the solution's best features."
"This solution is fast and very easy to understand, even if you are not a technician."
"The solution is good for cloud cost management."
"The pricing is rather competitive right now."
"The most valuable thing I have found is the cost saving recommendations"
"The product is easy to use in terms of monitoring all the environments. It works for multiple clouds."
"We use dashboards quite heavily, but one of the features that have really stood out is some of the policies we've created to alert us of particular situations."
"The solution is useful for cloud transparency and visibility in reports and dashboards that I have generated, especially the pre-populated dashboards."
 

Cons

"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."
"It would be good for Turbonomic, on their side, to integrate with other companies like AppDynamics or SolarWinds or other monitoring softwares. I feel that the actual monitoring of applications, mixed in with their abilities, would help. That would be the case wherever Turbonomic lacks the ability to monitor an application or in cases where applications are so customized that it's not going to be able to handle them. There is monitoring that you can do with scripting that you may not be able to do with Turbonomic."
"The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines."
"Remove the need for special in-house knowledge and development."
"I do not like Turbonomic's new licensing model. The previous model was pretty straightforward, whereas the new model incorporates what most of the vendors are doing now with cores and utilization. Our pricing under the new model will go up quite a bit. Before, it was pretty straightforward, easy to understand, and reasonable."
"Since the introduction of a HTML 5 based interface, our main - but minor - criticism of a less than intuitive operation managers' GUI would be the area of improvement."
"There are a few things that we did notice. It does kind of seem to run away from itself a little bit. It does seem to have a mind of its own sometimes. It goes out there and just kind of goes crazy. There needs to be something that kind of throttles things back a little bit. I have personally seen where we've been working on things, then pulled servers out of the VMware cluster and found that Turbonomic was still trying to ship resources to and from that node. So, there has to be some kind of throttling or ability for it to not be so buggy in that area. Because we've pulled nodes out of a cluster into maintenance mode, then brought it back up, and it tried to put workloads on that outside of a cluster. There may be something that is available for this, but it seems very kludgy to me."
"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."
"They can add some of those features to make the platform more usable for different backgrounds and developer skills."
"You don't get all the solution's benefits if you have older switches."
"The solution needs to be more simple."
"Improvements are needed in UI and multi-tenancy for this solution."
"The improvement I would like to see is not one thing particular to CloudCenter. I'd say it's more of a message that the system is still using a lot of the different products and if they would all just fit better together, they all could be faster together."
"The tool should improve its security on the XDR part."
"They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features."
"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 should provide information or tools to tune the cloud resources according to the environment size."
"CloudHealth needs to start building out Turbonomics-types of features that help the customers who are using CloudHealth really understand everything down to the server level, the virtual machine level."
"I would like to see better integration from CloudHealth to create easier setup and implementation."
"The solution doesn't offer the best functionality, unfortunately. Some features just simply aren't on offer. The solution needs to offer more product milestones."
"If you are working with the OS you need help and other connectors to get more information."
"The Perspectives feature could be better."
"The export features regarding CSV files and specifically around identifying savings plans have room for improvement, as well as the drill-down features for reservation utilization."
"It would be helpful to have a mobile version or a tablet version, especially for people who are outside of the office."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is in line with the other solutions that we have. It's not a bargain software, nor is it overly expensive."
"Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."
"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."
"Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."
"I don't know the current prices, but I like how the licensing is based on the number of instances instead of sockets, clusters, or cores. We have some VMs that are so heavy I can only fit four on one server. It's not cost-effective if we have to pay more for those. When I move around a VM SQL box with 30 cores and a half-terabyte of RAM, I'm not paying for an entire socket and cores where people assume you have at least 10 or 20 VMs on that socket for that pricing."
"In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."
"It's worth the time and money investment if you can afford it."
"I consider the pricing to be high."
"The tool's pricing is balanced with the market."
"The tool's pricing is expensive."
"The solution is extremely expensive and has additional fees for things like monitoring."
"CloudHealth has a subscription-based model."
"I give the cost of the solution an eight out of ten."
"The licensing fees depend on how big the company is. If you are a larger company then you have a better contract with a better price. The price is different for a small company."
"The pricing is competitive and while other products are good they are considerably more expensive."
"There could be flexibility in pricing for the product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
Computer Software Company
35%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
Educational Organization
31%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?
I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company be...
What needs improvement with Turbonomic?
I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can a...
What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?
I mostly provide it to my clients. There are multiple reasons why they would use it depending on the client's needs a...
What do you like most about Cisco CloudCenter?
The initial setup process is straightforward.
What needs improvement with Cisco CloudCenter?
They should provide an entire cloud offering, from architecture to network security features.
What is your primary use case for Cisco CloudCenter?
We use the product for demonstration, device provisioning, and data management.
What do you like most about CloudHealth?
The product is easy to use in terms of monitoring all the environments. It works for multiple clouds.
What needs improvement with CloudHealth?
There could be flexibility in pricing for the product. They should provide information or tools to tune the cloud res...
 

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
CliQr, CliQr CloudCenter
Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth, CloudHealth
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
NTT, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), CollabNet, Pratt & Miller, PZFlex
Pinterest, Dow Jones, RhythmOne, Ziff Davis, Acquia, Mentor Graphics, Lookout, Veracode, SwiftKey, Amtrak, Shi, Imgur, SumoLogic, NewsUK, Cloudera, Canvas
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco CloudCenter vs. VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.