We performed a comparison between DX Unified Infrastructure Management and Pico Corvil Analytics based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in Network Monitoring Software."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"This solution allows us to have an overview of the infrastructure and identify areas where the performance isn't optimal, or where upgrades could be carried out."
"Probe packages and probe deployment."
"It delivers our customers many metrics, so they may make decisions"
"It is easy to implement but requires good planning."
"The ability to monitor any platform. We have Windows, Linux, AIX, and mainframe all being monitored with the same UIM infrastructure."
"You can integrate clouds, hybrid infrastructure, and on-premise infrastructure into one product."
"Technical support is great."
"The monitoring of the applications to let our business know when things are performing and that they're up and available."
"What is most valuable is the ability to troubleshoot when a client complains of spikes in latencies. It gives us the ability to go granular, all the way down to looking at the network packets and analyze them."
"We use the data to analyze how much time we spend within the applications. Then, based on that, we are doing multiple analyses and types of investigations to work on reducing the amount of time spent on the latency, which helps our applications."
"Time-series graphs are very good for performance analysis. We can do comparisons... We can say this is the latency in the last 24 hours, and this was the same 24-hour period a week ago and overlay the two time-series graphs on top of each other, so we can see the difference. That's a really powerful tool for us."
"With the Corvil Stored Data Analyzer module, we can use it for test data or a set of production data to set up the configuration for latency setup, so we can use the fields to correlate messages."
"We're able to quickly drill down and find answers to events that are happening in real-time, using Corvil's analytics tools. That's the feature which is most in the spotlight..."
"We like the dashboards because they essentially organize all the sessions into one viewpoint."
"It has all the decoders so it's capturing every network packet and it's decoding in real-time and it's giving us latency information in real-time... It's the real-time decoding and getting the latency information statistics that we find the most useful."
"The performance metrics are pretty good. We've got everything from the network layer to the actual application layer. We can see what's going on with things like sending time and batching."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I think it can be improved by a greater provision of specialized technical support, as there are very few trained personnel there."
"CA UIM needs some improvement with performance reporting (if we compare it to CA eHealth)."
"Reporting capability can be improved especially when it comes to availability."
"We've had issues with pulling reports."
"We want to see more investment in the UI and the dashboard."
"Within this product there are individual probes, and each of these probes doesn't always necessarily output the same kind of information into our database. So when we try to collect what's called QoS data, from one probe we might get a ton of information, lots of good stuff that we can use in our database, but then from another probe, we might not get so much or we might not be able to pull the things that we want to."
"It would be good to implement views showing the aggregated status graphically."
"The only challenge that I have with this solution is the reporting part. The users are not really comfortable with the kind of reports they are getting. Sometimes, they want to see reports in their own format. Customizing those reports with Jasper is not very easy. It could be because of the knowledge gap. If you have the knowledge of how Jasper can be configured to suit customer requirements in terms of reporting, it is good. There was a time a customer complained about one issue related to Netflow analysis. Broadcom has a separate model for that, but the customer wanted everything bundled together. It could also have IP management so that I am able to see or analyze IPs so that the IPs that are already in use don't get assigned."
"The creation of charts and real-time windows was somewhat cumbersome. The vendor's website had an application called App Agent that required improvement. This API was designed to track message rates between microservers ingested into a microservice memory map. It allowed users to monitor the number of transactions that occurred at specific points within the application, and it was quite impressive. However, it had some limitations, and it mainly served as a tool for basic tracking. The protocols it employed could reveal the type of server-to-server communication and the specific order types, but it was not able to provide a more in-depth analysis of the application. The vendor has the potential to integrate application metrics more extensively into their product suite."
"In terms of performance analysis, if you really want to dig down into the minutiae and get statistics on the important things... that would be the only piece lacking because, in our environment, we have thousands and thousands of symbols. With the architecture that Corvil is built on, it's cumbersome."
"The analytics feature is very nice, but it's mostly software. We are hoping that it could be embedded in ASICs, so it could be faster."
"Before I got the Corvil training... one thing that was not very efficient was that every time you had to create a new stream or a new session from within Corvil... you had to tell it what protocol the message is going to come through and how to correlate messages, etc... After I went for the training, they had already added these nice features in the 9.4 version where it could do auto-discovery... Based on the traffic that it has already seen, it could create sessions on the fly."
"Overall, the Corvil device needs a little bit of training for people to handle it. If that could be reduced and made more user-friendly, more intuitive, it would be better."
"There is definitely room for improvement in the reporting. We've tried to use the reporting in Corvil but, to me, it feels like a bolt-on, like not a lot of thought has gone into it. The whole interface where you build reports and schedule them is very clunky."
"I have seen errors where the CNE and the CMC haven't synced because of something missing in the CMC, which was there in the CNE. We would get some type of error, but it doesn't actually say what exactly was missing in the CNE."
"It's quite difficult to see, sometimes, how hard your Corvil is working. When we had a very busy feed that chucked out a lot of data it wasn't working very well on Corvil. We had to raise a case for it. It turned out to be that, in fact, we were overloading Corvil."
More DX Unified Infrastructure Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
DX Unified Infrastructure Management is ranked 38th in Network Monitoring Software with 120 reviews while Pico Corvil Analytics is ranked 51st in Network Monitoring Software with 9 reviews. DX Unified Infrastructure Management is rated 8.2, while Pico Corvil Analytics is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of DX Unified Infrastructure Management writes "Easy to set up, simple to use, and offers great technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pico Corvil Analytics writes "Helpful support agents, beneficial issue detection, and high availability". DX Unified Infrastructure Management is most compared with DX SaaS, SCOM, DX Spectrum, ManageEngine OpManager and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor, whereas Pico Corvil Analytics is most compared with NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline, ThousandEyes and ITRS Geneos.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
