CloudCheckr vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Spot by NetApp Logo
740 views|539 comparisons
IBM Logo
5,752 views|2,746 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CloudCheckr and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic Report (Updated: March 2024).
763,955 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization.""The solution is mostly stable.""The best feature I like about CloudCheckr CMx High Security is its simplicity. I love that it's not rocket science to use the solution. Even if you're not familiar with the cloud, you can easily figure out how to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You can use AWS, you can use Azure, and you can use GCP with the solution because the integration is quite simple. You can also use multi-cloud with it, and you could see the billing part. You'll have complete visibility into your cost which I love about the solution. I also love that data on any security issues and vulnerabilities are available on the go with CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You don't need to do anything different. Just run the scan and you'll have all these open findings in the tool, in terms of the priority level, so if it's critical, it will tell you, "It's critical," and you need to fix it right away.""It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better.""The initial setup is straightforward.""The solution is scalable for our purposes.""The recommendation section is pretty helpful.""The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."

More CloudCheckr Pros →

"I like Turbonomic's built-in reporting. It provides a ton of information out of the box, so I don't have to build panels for the monthly summaries and other reports I need to present to management. We get better performance and bottleneck reporting from this than we do from our older EMC software.""With Turbonomic, we were able to reduce our ESX cluster size and save money on our maintenance and license renewals. It saved us around $75,000 per year but it's a one-time reduction in VMware licensing. We don't renew the support. The ongoing savings is probably $50,000 to $75,000 a year, but there was a one-time of $200,000 plus.""Before implementing Turbonomic, we had difficulty reaching a consensus about VM placement and sizing. Everybody's opinion was wrong, including mine. The application developers, implementers, and infrastructure team could never decide the appropriate size of a virtual machine. I always made the machines small, and they always made them too big. We were both probably wrong.""We have a system where our developers automate machine builds, and that is constantly running out of resources. Turbonomic helps us with that, so I don't have to keep buying hardware. The developers always say, "They don't have enough. They don't have enough. They don't have enough," when they just configured it improperly. Therefore, Turbonomic helps us identify configuration issues on their side so it doesn't cost me money on the other end to buy resources that I don't really need.""In our organization, optimizing application performance is a continuous process that is beyond human scale. We would not be able to do the number of actions that Turbonomic takes on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. It is humanly impossible with the little micro adjustments that it can make. That is a huge differentiator. If you just figure each action could take anywhere very conservatively from five to 10 minutes to act upon, then you multiply that out by thousands of actions every month, it is easily something where you could say, "I am saving a couple of FTEs."""We have VM placement in Automated mode and currently have all other metrics in Recommend mode.""The notifications saying, "This is a corrective action," even though some of them can be automated, are always welcome to see. They summarize your entire infrastructure and how you can better utilize it. That is the biggest feature.""The recommendation of the family types is a huge help because it has saved us a lot of money. We use it primarily for that. Another thing that Turbonomic provides us with is a single platform that manages the full application stack and that's something I really like."

More IBM Turbonomic Pros →

Cons
"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool.""The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited.""Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help.""CloudCheckr CMx High Security is complex. There are a lot of menus, and if you do not know what you are looking for you can get lost. However, the interface is self-explanatory. It's easy to understand where to go to get what you want.""What needs to be improved in CloudCheckr CMx High Security is integration. All the clouds are going quite fast, for example, all the cloud providers: Microsoft, Google, etc. CloudCheckr CMx High Security is good with AWS, no doubt about it, but with Azure and Google Cloud, I find that the solution is slow in that direction. If the vendor planned for CloudCheckr CMx High Security to be automated just for AWS, then it does make sense. If not, if the vendor is also targeting good integration with Google and Microsoft, then CloudCheckr CMx High Security integration needs improvement, in particular, it has to be faster. At the moment, its integration with Azure is not as good as its integration with AWS. With GCP, integration is nowhere.""The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data.""The solution must improve its user interface.""The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."

More CloudCheckr Cons →

"There is an opportunity for improvement with some of Turbonomic's permissions internally for role-based access control. We would like the ability to come up with some customized permissions or scope permissions a bit differently than the product provides.""Turbonomic can modernize the look and feel, making it more user-friendly to access and obtain information.""Recovering resources when they're not needed is not as optimized as it could be.""They have a long road map when we ask for certain things that will make the product better. It takes time, but that's understandable because there are other things that are higher on the priority list.""The old interface was not the clearest UI in some areas, and could be quite intimidating when first using the tool.""Remove the need for special in-house knowledge and development.""We don't use Turbonomic for FinOps and part of the reason is its cost reporting. The reporting could be much more robust and, if that were the case, I could pitch it for FinOps.""Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing."

More IBM Turbonomic Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "A license is needed to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security, but because we are a managed service provider, the price of the license would vary. It depends on the type of cloud users we have, for example, it would be some type of percentage or monthly billing, etc."
  • "The solution is reasonably priced."
  • "The cost is on par with other providers."
  • More CloudCheckr Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "We felt the pricing was very fair for the product. It is in no way prohibitive for larger deployments, unlike other similar product on the market."
  • "Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."
  • "What I can advise is to trial the product, taking advantage of the Turbonomic pre-sales implemention support and kickstart training."
  • "Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."
  • "You should understand the cost of your physical servers and how much time and money you are spending year over year on expanding your virtual farm."
  • "Price is a big one. VMTurbo was very competitively priced."
  • "If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."
  • "It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."
  • More IBM Turbonomic Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
    763,955 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The solution is scalable for our purposes.
    Top Answer:I found it less useful. My group took the data and organized it with Tableau. I used CloudCheckr to verify what I was seeing in Tableau. The solution must improve its user interface.
    Top Answer:I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company before IBM's purchase, it was compatible with other tools.
    Top Answer:I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can add Azure NetApp Files. They can add Azure Blob storage. They have already added… more »
    Top Answer:I mostly provide it to my clients. There are multiple reasons why they would use it depending on the client's needs and their solution.
    Ranking
    23rd
    out of 75 in Cloud Management
    Views
    740
    Comparisons
    539
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    543
    Rating
    8.7
    4th
    out of 75 in Cloud Management
    Views
    5,752
    Comparisons
    2,746
    Reviews
    18
    Average Words per Review
    1,483
    Rating
    8.5
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP
    Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
    Learn More
    IBM
    Video Not Available
    Interactive Demo
    Overview
    CloudCheckr CMx High Security is a cloud management platform that provides complete visibility into cost and security issues. The primary use cases are day-to-day operations, cloud management, identifying open vulnerabilities and issues from a security perspective, and cost management and optimization. 

    The solution is praised for its stability, simplicity, ease of use, scalability, excellent technical support, and granular reporting. CloudCheckr CMx High Security provides priority-level data on security issues and vulnerabilities, making it easy to identify critical issues that need immediate attention.

    IBM Turbonomic is a performance and cost optimization platform for public, private, and hybrid clouds used by customers to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications through automated actions. Common use cases include cloud cost optimization, cloud migration planning, data center modernization, FinOps acceleration, Kubernetes optimization, sustainable IT, and application resource management. Turbonomic customers report an average 33% reduction in cloud and infrastructure waste without impacting application performance, and return-on-investment of 471% over three years. Ready to take a closer look? Explore the interactive demo or start your free 30-day trial today!

    Sample Customers
    Accenture, Logitech, Ingram, Cloudar, Infor, DXC, Cornell University, DLT, Lumen, Lightstream, Choice Hotels, B-Tech, SmileShark, PTP, Explicity, JCH Technology, Siemens Mobility
    IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company21%
    Retailer11%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    Government8%
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Insurance Company5%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise63%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise64%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise23%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise70%
    Buyer's Guide
    CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    763,955 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    CloudCheckr is ranked 23rd in Cloud Management with 5 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 4th in Cloud Management with 17 reviews. CloudCheckr is rated 7.6, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of CloudCheckr writes "Easy to figure out how to use, has a simple integration, and detects issues and vulnerabilities by priority level". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "Provides recommendations whether workloads should be scaled up or down". CloudCheckr is most compared with AWS Trusted Advisor, Azure Cost Management, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth, Apptio One and ServiceNow IT Operations Management, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth and VMware vSphere. See our CloudCheckr vs. IBM Turbonomic report.

    See our list of best Cloud Management vendors and best Cloud Cost Management vendors.

    We monitor all Cloud Management 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.