We performed a comparison between Cisco Intersight and Infraon IMS 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."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."
"I like Intersight because of the integration with HashiCorp, Kubernetes, and each cloud because Intersight is the IO module."
"Cisco Intersight has valuable features for workflow automation and inventory administration."
"Intersight can validate our environment."
"The tool helps to manage Cisco servers."
"Provides an overall view using a single portal."
"What I like most about Cisco Intersight is its manageability."
"Scalable portfolio of services for remote device management, with good cloud integration. It's also easy to set up."
"We use the solution to automatically trigger processes to help us resolve issues. The whole IT process has been automated, such as trying to map all the users and the escalation process. So, if any issue happens, we get an SMS and WhatsApp of the report. If there is a critical issue this has to be sorted out, like the entire data center being down, then there is an alarm."
"Our response time is within 30 minutes for any support. This solution provides alerts immediately, so we are within our SLA, giving efficiency to our support."
"The feature that I like the most and the best part is the customization."
"It is a stable product. After the initial configuration, you don't have to tweak it much. All systems of Everest IMS work perfectly."
"The role-based dashboards provide data points and charts and topology diagrams in a single window. It's like a spider web, where the application, connectivity, and everything is defined for each user of those applications."
"The most valuable feature is alerting. We get email alerts when a link is down that tell us which device is having a problem."
"The backup, restore, and comparison features are all good."
"Their discovery is very quick and they have a CSV file upload mechanism that allows you to onboard five thousand devices a day."
"When new features are added, the service becomes full of bugs."
"The solution needs some enhancement in order to build the cluster in two nodes."
"It's a very complex solution."
"The product could be easy to use."
"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."
"In the future, the solution needs to plan on an extension to cover a broader range of objects since, at present, there are some Cisco devices within the range of Intersight UCS that it can't manage."
"The product's setup should be easier."
"We have enquired if there are any possibilities of monitoring non-IPBS devices."
"I would like to have the option to add a new device or meet with the next release. Right now, it needs to be done from the backend which results in a heavy reliance on R&D."
"This solution is available in SaaS. The reason why we have not gone to SaaS is they do not have a country-specific separation of assets. There are GDPR and other requirements that might require country-specific sensitive information to be filtered as well as other things that need to be taken care of. Normally, if we need to do any compliance, like ISO27000 compliance, they don't have such a report within their system. This kind of report is missing from their SaaS. That is one of the reasons that we have gone to the on-prem version, where I am assured that my data is secure."
"Email support is a bit slow. Once you drop an email, it takes time."
"The GUI is in need of improvement. It is not drag-and-drop or easy to use."
"There might be some features in other products that are currently not there in Everest IMS and can be included. I have not yet compared it with any other product."
"The graphical view of the topology does not show us all of the connectivity in our network, which is something that could be improved."
"I would like to see an integrated view of Infraon IMS and Infraon Desk. It would be very helpful if that were integrated into the solution."
Cisco Intersight is ranked 26th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 10 reviews while Infraon IMS is ranked 64th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring. Cisco Intersight is rated 7.8, while Infraon IMS is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco Intersight writes "Scalable and easy to set up portfolio of services; good for remote device management and other functions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Infraon IMS writes "Provides data accuracy for availability and policy harmonization". Cisco Intersight is most compared with Cisco UCS Manager, HPE OneView, IBM Turbonomic, Cisco UCS Director and VMware Aria Operations, whereas Infraon IMS is most compared with Zabbix and Microsoft Configuration Manager. See our Cisco Intersight vs. Infraon IMS 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.
