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

Cisco UCS Manager vs Goliath Performance Monitor comparison

 

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 UCS Manager
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
31st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Goliath Performance Monitor
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
69th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Cisco UCS Manager is 1.3%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Goliath Performance Monitor is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco UCS Manager1.3%
Goliath Performance Monitor0.5%
Other98.2%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

RC
Consultant at rcnss
A market leader with an enhanced user interface for seamless experience
There is room for improvement in terms of cost and complexity to set up. It doesn't work straight out of the UCS, so someone who knows what they're doing is needed immediately, and it can be quite confusing. Some settings are still fairly well hidden, even the basic ones. Companies don't really understand how long it takes to set up. Also, when changes are pushed, it can take their phone line off the system for twenty minutes to half an hour. Out-of-the-box functionality is an issue, too. I know that my company is different, however, the basics are always the same. You do your tap lines, zip lines, and stuff like that, then you get your internal phone line system. That can all be automated and scripted, and it's probably part of the automation process. However, I haven't really seen it.
networke29316 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Systems Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 201-500 employees
Monitors well with Citrix, stable, and the support is very responsive
It looks like it is easy to scale, but I don't know how far it can go out. We are only a 300, or 400 person company. We are not terribly large. It looks like it should be able to scale up until 10,000 at least. There are two users in the company who use this solution, I use it, and the helpdesk.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system."
"Cisco UCS Manager is overall a good package because it offers a GUI interface and a CLI."
"The reporting functionality will give you any report you want."
"Ease of management is certainly the most valuable feature in this product."
"A main feature of Cisco UCS Manager is its reliability, as all of the computing blades are in cluster mode, so we experience high availability and can easily add compute resources and beef up the computing solution."
"It is more robust than other solutions. So, the stability is good."
"If I had to choose between other submissions, I would choose the Cisco UCS every time."
"Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
"I would definitely give them high praise for what they do, and for being a special niche product."
"In conclusion, I think Goliath Performance Monitor is a true winner."
"My overall conclusion is that it is a valuable product for simulating Citrix logons because it does it with minimal effort and with a real user account."
"Offers a diversity of features."
"I think Goliath offers a very good tool to do simulated Citrix logons with actual user accounts and that the reports are useful to monitor and debug a session."
"I like that the solution offers a diversity of things; it can give you resource monitoring, it can be integrated to detect an application crash, to capture syslog, things like that, and I like the diversity of the dashboard."
"I like that it not only has the ability to monitor but that it can do a lot of specific Citrix monitoring."
 

Cons

"The primary challenge we face is identifying the correct version to deploy during firmware upgrades or compute updates."
"The integration with other solutions could be better. I think Cisco can only integrate using Intersight. There is a second interface available as a SaaS platform, in the cloud, or on-premise. It's based on the Redfish protocol, which is standard for all the B-series servers in the market. We can integrate other solutions using API."
"The solution's pricing is high and could be reduced."
"Some settings are still fairly well hidden, even the basic ones."
"Cisco UCS Manager should have a simplified deployment in the sense of not having multiple machines, demilitarized zones, and on-premise options."
"We faced issue with Nexus vem licensing issue which makes our complete DC went isolated in connect"
"What's lacking in Cisco UCS Manager is the performance dashboard. If a blade has any performance issues, you should be able to create a dashboard on Cisco UCS Manager. Currently, this feature isn't present."
"The installation is very complex."
"The setup is a bit complex."
"Hardware requirements of the management server are kind of steep, 4cpu is quite a number."
"However, its GUI can use a little help. The navigation is not the most straightforward like many other monitoring tools."
"I would love to be able to tell what ISP the user is coming from."
"Issues with generating reports; consistency is not there."
"With Goliath IT Monitors, the processing speed is very slow."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We need to take a license for each port, which amounts to a big sum."
"With product discounts which can be negotiated, the product is a great value."
"Cisco UCS Manager’s annual licensing fee is expensive."
"You buy the hardware and then you get Cisco UCS Manager for free."
"Cisco UCS is more expensive than Dell and HP, but it is more reliable. I see less issues and it's quite stable."
"The pricing for Cisco UCS Manager is okay for its market, so it's a four out of five for me."
"The price seems reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise19
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco UCS Manager?
My experience with the pricing of Cisco UCS Manager ( /products/cisco-ucs-manager-reviews ) is that it is reasonable. Recently, we acquired an excellent bundle with significant discounts, with offe...
What needs improvement with Cisco UCS Manager?
For improvements, while the current graphical user interface is satisfactory, it could be further simplified for different tasks. While it has been improved from using Java to HTML, simplifying the...
What is your primary use case for Cisco UCS Manager?
Our primary use case involves working with Cisco UCS B-Series ( /products/cisco-ucs-b-series-reviews ), specifically the UCS X modular deployment. We are setting up a new deployment shortly.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Management Science Associates, Peak 10, Virtual Consulting Professionals
Walmart, Facebook, Xerox, UHS, ADP, Wyndham Worldwide
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco UCS Manager vs. Goliath Performance Monitor and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.