CloudEndure Live Migration vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CloudEndure Live Migration and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Migration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed CloudEndure Live Migration vs. IBM Turbonomic Report (Updated: November 2022).
656,474 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
"The product is reasonably priced.""The CloudEndure feature is most valuable because it is user friendly and very simple.""Live Migration's best feature is that it's free."

More CloudEndure Live Migration Pros →

"We can manage multiple environments using a single pane of glass, which is something that I really like.""Using this product helps us to reduce performance risk because it shows us where resources are needed but not yet allocated.""The automated memory balancing, where it looks at whether it's being used in the most efficient way and adds or takes away memory, is the best part. If it didn't do that, it would be something that I would have to do. We have too many machines for one person to do that. The automation helps me in that it is done in a really efficient way and a balanced way because of the policies. It really helps.""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.""The feature for optimizing VMs is the most valuable because a number of the agencies have workloads or VMs that are not really being used. Turbonomic enables us to say, 'If you combine these, or if you decide to go with a reserve instance, you will save this much.'""Turbonomic has helped optimize cloud operations and reduced our cloud costs significantly. Overall, we are at about 40 percent savings, and we spend about three million a year just in Azure. It reduces the size of the VMs, putting them into the right template for usage. People don't realize that you don't have to future-proof a virtual machine in Azure. You just need to build it for today. As the business or service grows, you can scale up or out. About 90 percent of all the costs that we've reduced has been from sizing machines appropriately.""We've saved hundreds of hours. Most of the time those hours would have to be after hours as well, which are more valuable to me as that's my personal time.""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.""

More IBM Turbonomic Pros →

Cons
"I do not see any improvements required for the CloudEndure.""Live Migration has some issues with target setups.""We would like to have a disaster recovery feature included in this solution."

More CloudEndure Live Migration Cons →

"Recovering resources when they're not needed is not as optimized as it could be.""I would love to see Turbonomic analyze backup data. We have had people in the past put servers into daily full backups with seven-year retention and where the disk size is two terabytes. So, every single day, there is a two terabyte snapshot put into a Blob somewhere. I would love to see Turbonomic say, "Here are all your backups along with the age of them," to help us manage the savings by not having us spend so much on the storage in Azure. That would be huge.""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.""The management interface seems to be designed for high-resolution screens. Somebody with a smaller-resolution screen might not like the web interface. I run a 4K monitor on it, so everything fits on the screen. With a lower resolution like 1080, you need to scroll a lot. Everything is in smaller windows. It doesn't seem to be designed for smaller screens.""The deployment process is a little tricky. It wasn't hard for me because I have pretty in-depth knowledge of Kubernetes, and their software runs on Kubernetes. To deploy it or upgrade it, you have to be able to follow steps and use the Kubernetes command line, or you'll need someone to come in and do it for you.""It would be nice for them to have a way to do something with physical machines, but I know that is not their strength Thankfully, the majority of our environment is virtual, but it would be nice to see this type of technology across some other platforms. It would be nice to have capacity planning across physical machines.""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.""The way it handles updates needs to be improved."

More IBM Turbonomic Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "I'm not involved in any of the billing, but my understanding is that is fairly expensive."
  • "We see ROI in extended support agreements (ESA) for old software. Migration activities seem to be where Turbonomic has really benefited us the most. It's one click and done. We have new machines ready to go with Turbonomic, which are properly sized instead of somebody sitting there with a spreadsheet and guessing. So, my return on investment would certainly be on currency, from a software and hardware perspective."
  • "When we have expanded our licensing, it has always been easy to make an ROI-based decision. So, it's reasonably priced. We would like to have it cheaper, but we get more benefit from it than we pay for it. At the end of the day, that's all you can hope for."
  • "I know there have been some issues with the billing, when the numbers were first proposed, as to how much we would save. There was a huge miscommunication on our part. Turbonomic was led to believe that we could optimize our AWS footprint, because we didn't know we couldn't. So, we were promised savings of $750,000. Then, when we came to implement Turbonomic, the developers in AWS said, "Absolutely not. You're not putting that in our environment. We can't scale down anything because they coded it." Our AWS environment is a legacy environment. It has all these old applications, where all the developers who have made it are no longer with the company. Those applications generate a ton of money for us. So, if one breaks, we are really in trouble and they didn't want to have to deal with an environment that was changing and couldn't be supported. That number went from $750,000 to about $450,000. However, that wasn't Turbonomic's fault."
  • "It is an endpoint type license, which is fine. It is not overly expensive."
  • "The pricing and licensing are fair. We purchase based on benchmark pricing, which we have been able to get. There are no surprise charges nor hidden fees."
  • "The product is fairly priced right now. Given its capabilities, it is excellently priced. We think that the product will become self-funding because we will be able to maximize our resources, which will help us from a capacity perspective. That should save us money in the long run."
  • "It's worth the time and money investment if you can afford it."
  • More IBM Turbonomic Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Migration solutions are best for your needs.
    656,474 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature is the live, block-to-block replication.
    Top Answer:One drawback to using CloudEndure is that the default is to give one small, lightweight server, which is created in the cloud. From there, we need to switch over to the actual target server. My… more »
    Top Answer:We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we use to assist our customers. The primary use of this solution is to transfer data from on-premises to the cloud. One of my customers… more »
    Top Answer:I don't know the current prices, but I like how the licensing is based on the number of instances instead of sockets, clusters, or cores. We have some VMs that are so heavy I can only fit four on one… more »
    Top Answer:The management interface seems to be designed for high-resolution screens. Somebody with a smaller-resolution screen might not like the web interface. I run a 4K monitor on it, so everything fits on… more »
    Top Answer:We use Turbonomic to evaluate all of our virtualized clusters. Initially, we were only using Turbonomic for our long-term VMware stacks. Now we are monitoring VMware ESXi 7 and Nutanix AHV stacks. On… more »
    Ranking
    10th
    out of 30 in Cloud Migration
    Views
    1,781
    Comparisons
    1,411
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    237
    Rating
    8.0
    1st
    out of 30 in Cloud Migration
    Views
    9,692
    Comparisons
    4,950
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    2,036
    Rating
    8.9
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
    Learn More
    Overview

    CloudEndure's Live Migration technology enables companies to reduce migration complexity and eliminate risk. It's automated migration solution utilizes block-level continuous replication, application stack orchestration, and automated machine conversion to ensure 100% data integrity. Whether you are migrating to, across, or within clouds, CloudEndure Live Migration gives you the flexibility and security enterprises need to succeed in today’s fast-paced digital ecosystem.

    IBM Turbonomic Application Resource Management (ARM) software is used by customers to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications across hybrid and multicloud environments. 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.

    For further information, please visit www.ibm.com/cloud/turbonomic

    Ready to take a closer look? Request a demo today.

    Offer
    Learn more about CloudEndure Live Migration
    Learn more about IBM Turbonomic
    Sample Customers
    Agio, Cloud Nation, Limelight Networks
    J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmerica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Media Company21%
    Computer Software Company19%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Manufacturing Company5%
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company13%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Manufacturing Company12%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company26%
    Comms Service Provider11%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise74%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise25%
    Large Enterprise58%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise67%
    Buyer's Guide
    CloudEndure Live Migration vs. IBM Turbonomic
    November 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about CloudEndure Live Migration vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: November 2022.
    656,474 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    CloudEndure Live Migration is ranked 10th in Cloud Migration with 3 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 1st in Cloud Migration with 20 reviews. CloudEndure Live Migration is rated 8.0, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of CloudEndure Live Migration writes "Well priced, easy to expand, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "Helps us optimize cloud operations, reducing our cloud costs". CloudEndure Live Migration is most compared with AWS Server Migration Service, Carbonite Migrate, Zerto, Velostrata and Vision Solutions Double-Take, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, CloudHealth, Cisco Intersight and Densify. See our CloudEndure Live Migration vs. IBM Turbonomic report.

    See our list of best Cloud Migration vendors.

    We monitor all Cloud Migration 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.