We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and Nagios Core 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."The interface is ergonomic and native. We can use UCS Manager to do all the configurations for the servers, including storage, networking, and all the other components we need inside the fabric. It's simple and flexible."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"We can configure the Cisco UCS Manager, the profiles and interactions with the resource we manage."
"The reporting functionality will give you any report you want."
"The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system."
"The most valuable features are flexibility and management."
"Technical support has been good so far. We haven't had any issues with them. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide our company."
"Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
"Alert calls occur anytime a service goes down or a matrix is difficult and that helps us to quickly restore service and transfer work."
"Provides timely notifications."
"Nagios monitors our servers, so we know if anything goes wrong and can solve the problem before it happens."
"The most valuable features are the reports and the way it generates the report in a graphical manner."
"We mostly use Nagios Core to integrate with Python and Bash Script."
"The solution is quite efficient."
"The most valuable feature depends on the project. It's great if you need to check to ensure a service is running 24/7. I can use the full solution for free, and it's flexible. If I need to add a dashboard, I can integrate it with Nagios. Cloud synchronization is wonderful."
"What I like about Nagios Core is that it helps me ensure everything is running smoothly by checking the status of hosts and services."
"Upgrading the firmware is a difficult procedure."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"I would like to see Cisco UCS optionally work as a hyper-converged system because right now, it only operates as a converged system."
"Getting a CLI report on routers, switches, or any other CLI configuration device is difficult."
"The automation within the solution needs to be simplified."
"The solution's pricing is high and could be reduced."
"The interface and the way it is constructed is very complex. They should work to simplify it. It's quite difficult for somebody who doesn't know the product very well. Users should be able to get proficient with it faster. There's definitely room for improvement there."
"I want to be able to schedule multiple sequential updates in one go."
"We're using the free version, which limits us in terms of the things that we can do. If we had the paid version, a lot of our issues would probably go away. For example, we can't isolate instances that are being built or updated with the production ones. When they're being built, on Nagios, they're showing in red. It'd be nice to be able to partition those off until they're all green, and then we can bring them into the environment. This is probably because we've got the free version and not the paid version. If we went for the paid version, it would probably allow us to do exactly what we want to or remove the restrictions that we have, but if we are able to isolate instances in the free version, it would make life much easier."
"The user interface could be more interactive because it is pretty basic."
"Nagios Core can improve the graphical interface, it would make things a little easier."
"The initial setup process could be easier."
"It would be nice if the company offered a sales or contract manager that was dedicated to our company so that we would have some sort of link to Nagios, and if we had issues or questions, we'd be able to contact them directly."
"Nagios Core could improve by adding a user interface. If you want the user interface you have to use Nagios XI."
"It is a bit slow due to latency."
"I would like to see a sensor that shows the traffic of a user and what they're doing on the network."
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 30th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while Nagios Core is ranked 7th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 46 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while Nagios Core is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nagios Core writes "An Open Source Fully Featured Data Centre Monitoring Tool". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, HPE OneView, Zabbix and Datadog, whereas Nagios Core is most compared with Zabbix, Nagios XI, Centreon, Icinga and OP5 Monitor. See our Cisco UCS Manager vs. Nagios Core 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.