CloudCheckr vs Red Hat CloudForms comparison

Spot by NetApp and Red Hat are both solutions in the Cloud Management category. Spot by NetApp is ranked #29 with an average rating of 7.0, while Red Hat is ranked #27 with an average rating of 6.5. Spot by NetApp holds a 1.1% mindshare in CM, compared to Red Hat’s 1.7% mindshare. Additionally, 66% of Spot by NetApp users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 66% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CloudCheckr and Red Hat CloudForms 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. Red Hat CloudForms Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. Red Hat CloudForms

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 817,234 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

IBM Turbonomic

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Cloud Management category, the mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 6.3%, down from 6.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CloudCheckr is 1.1%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat CloudForms is 1.7%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Cloud Management

Featured Reviews

SubashSubbiah

Assistant Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

It can tell us where performance is lagging on the hardware layer, but the reporting on the application layer is lacking

The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer. I would like them to add some apps for physical device load resourcing and physical-to-virtual calculation. It gives excellent recommendations for the virtual layer but doesn't have the capabilities for physical-to-virtual analysis. Automated deployment is something else they could add. Some built-in automation features are helpful, but we aren't effectively using a few. We want a few more automated features, like autoscaling and automatic performance optimization testing would be useful.

Read full review

Nigel Mullings

Enterprise Cloud Architect at Peritem Consultants Ltd

Beneficial granular reporting, highly stable, and excellent support

I have worked in the cost-management tools from many cloud providers, such as Amazon AWS, Google Cloud Services, and Azure. CloudCheckr CMx High Security has a lot more detail than the native cloud service cost-management tools. If you want an enterprise-grade solution, CloudCheckr CMx High Security would be a good fit. If you want something simple, out of the box, then you can use the cloud service's native tools.

Read full review

Ilhami Arikan

Cloud Services Automation Technologies Manager at Garanti Teknoloji

A stable solution that helps to provision servers

We use the solution to provision servers. I am impressed with the product's ability to create dynamic catalogs. The solution's provisioning engine needs to be improved. I would rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten. I would rate the product's scalability a seven out of ten and…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ability to monitor and automate both the right-sizing of VMs as well as to automate the vMotion of VMs across ESXi hosts."

"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."

"We have VM placement in Automated mode and currently have all other metrics in Recommend mode."

"Using this product helps us to reduce performance risk because it shows us where resources are needed but not yet allocated."

"It became obvious to us that there was a lot more being offered in the product that we could leverage to ensure our VMware environment was running efficiently."

"We have seen a 30% performance improvement overall."

"We like that Turbonomic shows application metrics and estimates the impact of taking a suggested action. It provides us a map of resource utilization as part of its recommendation. We evaluate and compare that to what we think would be appropriate from a human perspective to that what Turbonomic is doing, then take the best action going forward."

"I like Turbonomic's automation and AI machine learning features. It shows you what it can do, but it can also act on recommendations automatically. Integration with an APM system makes the AI/ML features truly effective. Understanding what the application is doing and the trends of application behavior can help you make real-world decisions and act on that information."

More IBM Turbonomic pros

"The solution is scalable for our purposes."

"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."

"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."

"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 mostly stable."

"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."

"The multi-tenancy feature has been very helpful for our clients. It has been working fine and seamlessly for them. Its interface is also very simplified, and it is also an open and easy-to-scale solution."

"The stability of the solution is very good. We haven't had any issues with it."

"They are a very mature product."

"I am impressed with the product's reports."

"The solution is compatible and integrates with various infrastructures or providers."

"I am impressed with the product's ability to create dynamic catalogs."

"Red Hat CloudForms is stable once it is up and running."

"The most valuable features of Red Hat CloudForms are the benefit of the collective functionality."

More Red Hat CloudForms pros

Cons

"Enhanced executive reporting standard with the tool beyond the reports that can be created today. Something that can easily be used with upper management on a monthly or quarterly basis to show the impact to our environment."

"There are a few things that we did notice. It does kind of seem to run away from itself a little bit. It does seem to have a mind of its own sometimes. It goes out there and just kind of goes crazy. There needs to be something that kind of throttles things back a little bit. I have personally seen where we've been working on things, then pulled servers out of the VMware cluster and found that Turbonomic was still trying to ship resources to and from that node. So, there has to be some kind of throttling or ability for it to not be so buggy in that area. Because we've pulled nodes out of a cluster into maintenance mode, then brought it back up, and it tried to put workloads on that outside of a cluster. There may be something that is available for this, but it seems very kludgy to me."

"In Azure, it's not what you're using. You purchase the whole 8 TB disk and you pay for it. It doesn't matter how much you're using. So something that I've asked for from Turbonomic is recommendations based on disk utilization. In the example of the 8 TB disk where only 200 GBs are being used, based on the history, there should be a recommendation like, "You can safely use a 500 GB disk." That would create a lot of savings."

"Additional interfaces would be helpful."

"I do not like Turbonomic's new licensing model. The previous model was pretty straightforward, whereas the new model incorporates what most of the vendors are doing now with cores and utilization. Our pricing under the new model will go up quite a bit. Before, it was pretty straightforward, easy to understand, and reasonable."

"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."

"The old interface was not the clearest UI in some areas, and could be quite intimidating when first using the tool."

"The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer."

More IBM Turbonomic cons

"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."

"The solution must improve its user interface."

"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."

"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."

"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."

"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."

"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."

"Because the solution needs to integrate with other products that surround it, there is a lot of configuration required, and this can be quite complex. It's not as easy as it is with, for example, VMware."

"The problem is that the platform requires it to be maintained and updated. Also, a few cases are still pending with the Red Hat support team since they are not closed yet."

"The solution is still quite immature."

"I have issues with the solution's permissions. Unlike VMware, the product doesn't allow folder-type permissions."

"Red Hat CloudForms could improve by allowing more customization of reports. We have to do a lot of coding to accomplish what we want. Additionally, the compatibility with the multi-cloud could improve. The latter versions of the solution removed Google support and the cost comparison between other clouds was high."

"All of the areas of Red Hat CloudForms could improve. It doesn't do half of the things that it says it can do out of the box. It takes configuration to make any of it work, which is not uncommon for solutions similar to this. However, it is frustrating."

"The complexity of the solution is a bit high in comparison to VMware."

"It is difficult to create a complete dashboard that includes all the needed features or catalogs."

More Red Hat CloudForms cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's worth the time and money investment if you can afford it."

"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."

"Price is a big one. VMTurbo was very competitively priced."

"Licensing is per socket, so load up on the cores rather than a lot of lower core CPUs."

"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."

"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."

"IBM Turbonomic is an investment that we believe will deliver positive returns."

"It is an endpoint type license, which is fine. It is not overly expensive."

More IBM Turbonomic pricing and cost advice

"The solution is reasonably priced."

"The cost is on par with other providers."

"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."

"Red Hat CloudForms is a bit expensive."

"The price of Red Hat CloudForms was not competitive, it was expensive."

"It is definitely cheaper than VMware. Everything is included. There is no challenge there."

"Red Hat CloudForms has a subscript-based pricing model. The cost is approximately $20,000 annually which allows you to use as many users as you want."

"The product's licensing is based on the number of servers."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

817,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Government

Computer Software Company

21%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Government

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

27%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Government

11%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?

It offers different scenarios. It provides more capabilities than many other tools available. Typically, its price is...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Turbonomic?

The implementation could be enhanced.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?

We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting...

See all answers

What do you like most about CloudCheckr ?

The recommendation section is pretty helpful.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudCheckr ?

The price depends on the actual Azure consumption and what we feed into it. The cost is on par with other providers.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudCheckr ?

We are not happy with the product’s reporting capabilities. We are planning to change the solution. The security comp...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat CloudForms?

I am impressed with the product's reports.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Red Hat CloudForms?

I have issues with the solution's permissions. Unlike VMware, the product doesn't allow folder-type permissions.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat CloudForms?

I would rate the product a four out of ten since its implementation is not as good as it sounds.

See all answers

Comparisons

VMware Aria Operations vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 20% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 13% of the time

VMware vSphere vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 10% of the time

Cisco Intersight vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 9% of the time

Cloudability vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM Turbonomic Competitors

Cloudability vs CloudCheckr

Compared 26% of the time

Apptio One vs CloudCheckr

Compared 21% of the time

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs CloudCheckr

Compared 20% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs CloudCheckr

Compared 17% of the time

More CloudCheckr Competitors

VMware Cloud Director vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 22% of the time

OpenNebula vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 20% of the time

Morpheus vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 19% of the time

VMware Aria Automation vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 14% of the time

IBM Spectrum Computing vs Red Hat CloudForms

Compared 13% of the time

More Red Hat CloudForms Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Turbonomic

November 2024

Download IBM Turbonomic product report

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr

November 2024

Download CloudCheckr product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat CloudForms

November 2024

Download Red Hat CloudForms product report

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager

CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP

No data available

Learn More

Video not available

IBM

Video not available

Spot by NetApp

Red Hat

Interactive Demo

IBM

Demo not available

Spot by NetApp

Demo not available

Red Hat

Overview

IBM Turbonomic is a performance and cost optimization platform for public, private, and hybrid clouds used by companies to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications through automated actions.

IBM Turbonomic leverages AI to continuously analyze application resource consumption, deliver insights and dashboards, and make real-time adjustments. Common use cases include cloud cost optimization, cloud migration planning, data center modernization, FinOps acceleration, Kubernetes optimization, sustainable IT, and application resource management. By integrating with various cloud platforms, on-premise infrastructures, and containers, IBM Turbonomic provides a holistic view of the environment, ensuring that resources are allocated efficiently.

The solution is designed to support complex IT environments, offering actionable insights and automated actions that help IT teams proactively manage application performance and infrastructure resources. 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.

IBM Turbonomic manages resources across hybrid and on-premises data centers to ensure efficiency and financial impact awareness. It automates resource allocation, balances memory dynamically, and provides robust performance metrics. Users benefit from its ability to prevent resource starvation and offer cost-saving recommendations through continuous management. Executive Dashboards provide insights for cost justification and resource management, making IT operations simpler with AI-driven automation and actionable recommendations.

What are the most important features of IBM Turbonomic?

Automated Resource Allocation: Dynamically allocates resources for optimal performance.
Dynamic Memory Balancing: Adjusts memory allocation to prevent resource shortages.
Right-Sizing: Sizes VMs accurately for Azure and on-prem environments.
Single Platform Management: Manages resources across hybrid and on-premises data centers.
Proactive Performance Optimization: Continuously optimizes performance to prevent issues.
Kubernetes Support: Enhances container management with robust support.
Cost-Saving Recommendations: Provides actionable tips for reducing expenses.

What benefits should users look for in IBM Turbonomic reviews?

Cost Reduction: Helps minimize expenses through efficient resource management.
Performance Improvement: Enhances application performance by preventing resource starvation.
Detailed Insights: Offers comprehensive analytics to justify costs and resource utilization.
Simplified IT Processes: Uses AI automation to streamline operations.

IBM Turbonomic is implemented across multiple industries, including finance for optimizing peak payroll processing, IT for enhanced virtual server management, and healthcare for reliable performance monitoring. Organizations benefit from its robust automation, ensuring maximum efficiency and cost savings.

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.

Manage container, virtual, private, and public cloud infrastructures

Managing a complex, hybrid IT environment can require multiple management tools, redundant policy implementations, and extra staff to handle the operations. Red Hat® CloudForms simplifies IT, providing unified management and operations in a hybrid environment.

As your IT infrastructure progresses from traditional virtualization toward an Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) model, CloudForms evolves, protecting your investments and providing consistent user experience and functionality.

Sample Customers

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.

Accenture, Logitech, Ingram, Cloudar, Infor, DXC, Cornell University, DLT, Lumen, Lightstream, Choice Hotels, B-Tech, SmileShark, PTP, Explicity, JCH Technology, Siemens Mobility

Cox Automotive, Penn State, FICO, G-ABLE, Seneca College, ITandTEL, The Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), MyRepublic, Macquarie, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, CBTS, Network Data Solutions (NDS)

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr vs. Red Hat CloudForms

December 2024

Free Report: CloudCheckr vs. Red Hat CloudForms

Find out what your peers are saying about CloudCheckr vs. Red Hat CloudForms and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

817,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CloudCheckr vs. Red Hat CloudForms report.

See our list of best Cloud 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.