No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Intersight vs Zenoss Cloud comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Intersight
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (7th)
Zenoss Cloud
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
52nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (19th), Event Monitoring (14th), Network Monitoring Software (63rd), Server Monitoring (25th), Container Monitoring (9th), Cloud Monitoring Software (42nd), AIOps (28th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Cisco Intersight is 1.5%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zenoss Cloud is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Intersight1.5%
Zenoss Cloud1.2%
Other97.3%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2922069 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Developer
Centralized monitoring has improved visibility and standardizes profiles across multiple sites
One area where Cisco Intersight could be improved is making the interface and troubleshooting workflows more intuitive, especially for users who do not work with the platform every day. Sometimes finding the exact information needed or understanding certain alerts can require navigating to multiple locations. I would also appreciate more actionable recommendations alongside alerts rather than just identifying an issue and leaving the next step entirely to me. Overall, the functionality is strong, but improving usability and making troubleshooting more straightforward would enhance the everyday experience. Apart from usability, Cisco Intersight could benefit from smoother integration with third-party monitoring and IT management tools. Having alerts, performance data, and infrastructure information flow more seamlessly between platforms would reduce the need to switch between different systems. Performance-wise, keeping dashboards responsive when managing larger environments would also be important. I would also like to see more practical documentation, particularly step-by-step troubleshooting guides and real-world examples for automation workflows. These improvements would make the platform more accessible and efficient for everyday operations for new and existing users. Smoother integration with third-party monitoring and IT management tools would allow alerts, performance data, and infrastructure information to flow more seamlessly between platforms. These improvements, including usability enhancements, would make the platform more accessible and efficient for new and existing users.
ClaudiaChen - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Architect - Senior Technology Architect at Telstra
Generates close to real-time alerts so users can resolve issues, but needs more integration and public cloud monitoring features
As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cisco Intersight is not just a monitoring dashboard, but its real value comes from bringing infrastructure visibility, management, and automation together in one platform."
"Cisco Intersight has positively impacted my organization by providing more automation and less manual work, as everything can be automatic after registration to Cisco Intersight and offering more visibility as well."
"Our organization uses Cisco Intersight since it helps manage our physical infrastructure."
"Intersight can validate our environment."
"Cisco Intersight is a very effective tool for data center infrastructure management."
"Overall, I rate Cisco Intersight a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features I find in Cisco Intersight include the fact that it's a cloud-managed solution, which automates the process when a part on the server goes faulty, for example, if you have a module that goes faulty, automatically a TAC case opens at the Cisco level, and everything is automated, meaning there's no need to check for this."
"The product has good integration."
"The custom built integration is one of the most valuable features because you can see all the especially critical items."
"With this solution, they can have one million users at the same time with no crashes."
"What I like most about Zenoss Service Dynamics is that it monitors the devices and gives close to real-time alerts. For example, in case the device is not available, Zenoss Service Dynamics generates an alert so my team can resolve the issue."
"Zenoss is more complex than LogicMonitor, but scalable and hugely customizable."
"It is the most flexible solution of this type, but it takes time to adapt."
"The product offers good documentation that helps with initial training."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible discovery mechanism."
"It's easy to use."
 

Cons

"Cisco Intersight is a stable product, but it needs some improvement."
"The unique problem with Cisco Intersight is that it's not supporting some players."
"The firmware management in the S-Series is not as Cisco described when we purchased it. You should be able to manage firmware without bringing the host down, but that is not the case."
"The UI and interface are too complex, and I believe visual focus or visual policies must be more easily managed."
"Cisco Intersight's license cost is very high compared to AWS and Azure solutions, which have lower initiation costs. The high initial cost is a significant concern."
"I believe Cisco Intersight's licensing is quite expensive for a public healthcare environment, and I would like to see lower prices for us."
"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."
"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."
"The AI aspect needs to improve."
"As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor."
"Technical support is 3/10, poor: Incomplete and poor documentation Undocumented processes Inconsistent solutions to problems depending on source"
"There was a problem with Zenoss and storage monitoring."
"Now it is stable, but they should design threshold parameters in percentage instead of raw values."
"It would be ideal if the product offered sound alerts."
"There is room for improvement with the administrative part. They introduced Control Center to manage things in Zenoss 5. The services that Zenoss provides remained the same, but the administrative part, since they introduced Docker, etc., has become a little complex"
"This solution is complex for beginners so it takes some time to learn."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You can get a free license for monitoring but need to purchase a license if you need extra control."
"The product is cost-effective."
"Cisco Intersight has competitive pricing. On a scale of one to five, my rating for its pricing is four."
"Cisco Intersight is not cheap, but it's not the most expensive product either."
"It's just the standard licensing cost. There are no additional fees."
"There are additional costs you'll have to pay apart from the license fee for Zenoss Service Dynamics. I can't remember exactly how much my company is paying because I don't handle the finance part, but the cost is paid annually. On a scale of one to five, with one being the cheapest and five being the most expensive, I'm rating the solution three out of five."
"It is very cost-effective compared to the tools I worked with in the past. The company is gaining a lot with respect to the cost factor. It provides agentless monitoring and in a very cheap way."
"The pricing depends on the environment, the number of services, and the size of the data center. It can go from $100,000 to a million dollars."
"It depends on the customer, what he wants."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Comms Service Provider
15%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Transportation Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cisco Intersight?
Regarding improvements for Cisco Intersight, I would say more third-party integration is needed. At the moment it does have a basic integration of Pure Storage, so I can add my Pure Storage if I ha...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Intersight?
My main use case for Cisco Intersight is to register our Cisco UCS servers and apply profiles to our servers with configurations, firmware deployment automatically, and install the operating system...
What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Intersight?
I would rate Cisco Intersight a nine out of ten. I give it a nine because personally, I think it is one of the best management tools ever. I have worked before with different server vendors and dif...
What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
In my experience, I worked with many monitoring software, but the one that gave me the most functionalities of a large-scale company is Zenoss, due to its ability to monitor completely hybrid and a...
 

Also Known As

Intersight
Cloud Monitoring, Zenoss Service Dynamics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EXMAR, RapidScale
2degrees, Rackspace, State of North Dakota, El Paso Independent School District, NWN Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Intersight vs. Zenoss Cloud and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.