Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Goliath Performance Monitor vs Pandora FMS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Goliath Performance Monitor
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
59th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Pandora FMS
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
40th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (41st), Server Monitoring (16th), Log Management (40th), Cloud Monitoring Software (28th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Goliath Performance Monitor is 0.2%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pandora FMS is 0.5%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

networke29316 - PeerSpot reviewer
Monitors well with Citrix, stable, and the support is very responsive
It looks like it is easy to scale, but I don't know how far it can go out. We are only a 300, or 400 person company. We are not terribly large. It looks like it should be able to scale up until 10,000 at least. There are two users in the company who use this solution, I use it, and the helpdesk.
Gabriel Glusgold - PeerSpot reviewer
Personalized metrics; simplicity of data
My primary use case for Pandora is monitoring This solution has helped us improve our organization by allowing us to create a lot of metrics on several platforms, including Windows, Linux, and Unix. We then use these Pandora metrics to create an interface. We then pass the interface off to the…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Offers a diversity of features."
"I like that it not only has the ability to monitor but that it can do a lot of specific Citrix monitoring."
"Pandora's architecture is interesting. It's open so you can easily extend and enhance it. It's simpler to customize Pandora compared to other solutions. It's also scalable enough to support large environments."
"The solution is so lightweight that with only 4GB of ram, it allows keeping track of up to two hundred agents from a single console."
"I like this solution a lot because it has a very large Hispanic community and the platform looks very friendly."
"The most valuable feature is that it is an all-in-one monitoring system."
"This solution has screens that are easy to understand and provide a wealth of information."
"You can configure several types of architecture for high availability or load balancing."
"This product has allowed us to identify and correct certain issues that were affecting our solution."
"It provides us with proactive monitoring and is very easy to configure and maintain."
 

Cons

"I would love to be able to tell what ISP the user is coming from."
"Issues with generating reports; consistency is not there."
"I would like for the solution to be faster and have a better tolerance between parallel servers for Pandora and Pest Control."
"An update to the Android app would be appreciated."
"The product lacks APIs for integration with other systems."
"The price for Pandora FMS is expensive."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"I sincerely believe that Pandora needs new ideas for functionality closer to advanced device security monitoring."
"Pandora FMS is relatively new, and the interface with the older version crashes at times. We have several different operating systems, such as Linux and Windows, and Pandora does not run as well in these."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price seems reasonable."
"My rule of thumb would be that if you need more than thirty agents, and you lack an automation tool such as Chef or Puppet, you will save a lot of time and money going to the Enterprise edition."
"You have to pay for the number of agents and models that you are monitoring. I would rate the cost at three with one being the most expensive and five being the cheapest."
"You get the license and it includes updates, new versions, and access to the complete library of modules."
"Growing the solution or migrating to the Enterprise version is easy, and various plans are available."
"The open-source version offers 100% functionality and the hardware requirements for a solution like this one are very modest."
"Only one payment and it includes support, updates, new versions, and access to the complete library of plugins except for SAP and z/OS."
"They are very competitive on the pricing side. That's one reason why my manager keeps using it."
"In terms of money, the Enterprise version is the cheapest that I have found after a market study."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
850,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
20%
University
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
9%
Media Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Facebook, Xerox, UHS, ADP, Wyndham Worldwide
Rakuten, Prosegur, Repsol, Teléfonica, Allianz, Ottawa Hospital, Hughes
Find out what your peers are saying about Goliath Performance Monitor vs. Pandora FMS and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.