Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco DNA Center vs ScienceLogic comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.5
Cisco DNA Center enhances efficiency by reducing configuration time, despite licensing costs, with positive but varied ROI evaluations.
Sentiment score
7.5
ScienceLogic enhances service quality, reduces incidents, and strengthens brand reputation, making it valuable for enterprises despite initial costs.
Although Cisco DNA Center is expensive, we have seen a return on investment in terms of time savings.
The return on investment is fair but often challenged by medium-sized businesses who may question its adequacy.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
Cisco's DNA Center support is praised for responsiveness but criticized for slow responses and challenges with complex issues.
Sentiment score
7.8
ScienceLogic's support team is praised for professionalism and expertise, despite occasional delays, ensuring quick resolutions and customer satisfaction.
Overall, Cisco DNA Center rates eight out of ten as a complete solution.
I received excellent support from ScienceLogic.
Problems with Skylar may require longer wait times due to limited resource expertise.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Cisco DNA Center is highly scalable, effectively supports small to large networks, but licensing costs can be high.
Sentiment score
6.9
ScienceLogic effectively handles global scalability, despite some hardware challenges, and supports enterprise growth with customizable automation features.
The solution is designed for large enterprise companies.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Cisco DNA Center is generally stable, with some users reporting occasional bugs and needed updates affecting stability.
Sentiment score
7.1
ScienceLogic is stable and scalable, though occasional bugs occur during upgrades; users rate its stability between six and nine.
The stability rating is nine out of ten, acknowledging some bugs, but indicating these are minor issues.
 

Room For Improvement

Cisco DNA Center needs better integration, user-friendliness, and support, with pricing, scalability, and compatibility issues impacting its effectiveness.
ScienceLogic needs better reporting, user interface, vendor support, simpler integration, improved API, and efficient application monitoring for enterprises.
The AI-driven insights have contributed significantly to faster troubleshooting and predictive analytics.
While some other companies have easier APIs, using this solution demands significant expertise.
If the knowledge for implementation could be spread through articles, it would reduce this dependency.
Integrating observability and APM monitoring into the overall portfolio would be beneficial.
 

Setup Cost

Cisco DNA Center is costly, justified for enterprises, challenging for mid-market, with SaaS and promotions occasionally aiding affordability.
ScienceLogic offers flexible yet potentially high pricing, starting at $25K, with costs based on device count and features.
ScienceLogic is not that expensive and is cost-effective overall.
It could be cheaper.
 

Valuable Features

Cisco DNA Center provides centralized management, security, AI-driven insights, and automation, enhancing network control and operational efficiency.
ScienceLogic provides scalable, customizable monitoring with advanced analytics and integration, enhancing service delivery through intuitive and flexible solutions.
The most valuable features include AI-driven insights which make troubleshooting much easier.
Notably, its automation features, such as Runbook action, enable domain experts like me to execute one-click automation solutions, which contributes significantly to reducing MTTR.
The solution excels in three areas: application monitoring, server monitoring, and network performance monitoring.
The CMDB update and the automatic CMDB update are valuable.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco DNA Center
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (1st), Network Automation (2nd)
ScienceLogic
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
26th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (6th), Unified Communications Monitoring (1st), Server Monitoring (13th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (21st), IT Operations Analytics (7th), Cloud Monitoring Software (16th), AIOps (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of Cisco DNA Center is 1.4%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScienceLogic is 1.3%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Ahmed  Helmy - PeerSpot reviewer
Experience unified visibility and monitoring for enterprise campus and significant time savings and enhanced troubleshooting with reliable support
We have been working with Cisco DNA Center for ten years. Our clients use Cisco DNA Center for unified visibility/monitoring across Enterprise Campus both LAN & WLAN along with Access and fast technical issues troubleshooting The solution provides fast troubleshooting capabilities and fast…
Michael Wenn - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers comprehensive monitoring and tool consolidation but integration complexity needs improvement
There is room for improvement in the speed of setting up the service and integrating PowerPacks. Although these prebuilt features are great, there is considerable complexity in bringing them together to create a unified dashboard. Even with many good integrations and deep visibility, the implementation takes time, especially when it doesn't involve these integrations. While some other companies have easier APIs, using this solution demands significant expertise. It's challenging for new customers to implement independently. The implementation speed of non-PowerPack or non-out-of-the-box integrations should be improved. Additionally, the AI automation feature is not yet very rich due to resource constraints supporting a wide platform.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
859,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco DNA Center?
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it gives some kind of ease in operations, especially since our company is moving from CLI to GUI-based configuration.
What needs improvement with Cisco DNA Center?
The system is working fine for me currently.
What do you like most about ScienceLogic?
The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ScienceLogic?
ScienceLogic is not that expensive and is cost-effective overall.
What needs improvement with ScienceLogic?
ScienceLogic is working towards a kind of AI, DKAIRA enablement, but I find one dependency is the frequent need to rely on professional services. If the knowledge for implementation could be spread...
 

Also Known As

DNA Center
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Kellogg Company, Booz Allen, Cisco, Red Bull, Fidelus, Telstra, Comcast, CSC, Peak 10, HughesNet, Hosting, Datapipe, US Army, Equinix, Rite Aid, Carbonite, Sybase, Carpathia, AT&T, ePlus, Dimension Data, Virtustream, Boeing, Honeywell
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco DNA Center vs. ScienceLogic and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.