We performed a comparison between Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) and IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Our company has a corporate account for Google Cloud and so our systems and clusters integrate really well."
"I like the monitoring feature."
"It's easy to use."
"Google's technical support is very good."
"Provides visibility into the performance uptime."
"The cloud login enables us to get our logs from the different platforms that we currently use."
"The features that I have found most valuable are its graphs - if I need any statistics, in Kubernetes or Kong level or VPN level, I can quickly get the reports."
"We find the solution to be stable."
More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Pros →
"The network data collection has been very flexible for us. It's been thorough in areas that were lacking. They have a team that I've worked with to add other pieces to it. So if it's missing something out of the box, they work with me to add it. I was able to collect that data. It's not perfect, but it's pretty thorough."
"It's given us the ability to create various real-time network performance reports and distribute them to any colleague who can access these reports immediately."
"It's a great solution for highlighting and discovering useful information regarding our network's elements."
"We find that the reporting is particularly valuable in terms of not only communicating with our peer teams but also with the executives."
"SevOne’s data collection functionality is very good. From a collection point of view, we pull SNMP data, which is simple. It is easy to manipulate the pull in the estate. It is really simple compared to some of the other products that we have used. However, for deferred data, i.e., things that we import or don't pull directly, we tend to have a preplanned integration. So, its Universal Collector is really useful."
"It also gives us the closest thing to real-time insight into network performance that we have, with just a 10-second delay. It's very important for us to know the health of the infrastructure very quickly."
"The most valuable feature as of late has been the API integration with ServiceNow."
"SevOne has rich API capabilities, giving us the flexibility to control what we collect and customize the collection, creation, and manipulation of now metrics as necessary."
"It could be even more automated."
"The logging functionality could be better."
"The product provides minimal metrics that are insufficient."
"It is difficult to estimate in advance how much something is going to cost."
"If I want to track any round-trip or breakdowns of my response times, I'm not able to get it. My request goes through various levels of the Google Cloud Platform (GCP) and comes back to my client machine. Suppose that my request has taken 10 seconds overall, so if I want to break it down, to see where the delay is happening within my architecture, I am not able to find that out using Stackdriver."
"It could be more stable."
"This solution could be improved if it offered the ability to analyze charts, such as a solution like Kibana."
"While we are satisfied with the overall performance, in certain cases we must add additional metrics and additional tools like Grafana and Dynatrace."
More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Cons →
"The method of searching for SIP and the way to create the groups."
"One area that requires a little bit of improvement is the topology of visualization and being able to map out connections, end-to-end. It's able to do that, but it's not as impressive as we would like it to be. We would like to understand the different interface types and the connection points better, through the visualization. Heatmaps also need further development."
"SevOne should work with the graphs legend functionality."
"The reports are easy to configure but they are a bit outdated in terms of appearance and visualization."
"The reporting of NMS is good, but it could be better."
"There is no service mode setup in this monitoring tool if you want to snooze alerts for any specific amount of time, to account for any activity change or major incident."
"High-frequency polling is data-intensive because you're pulling more. If SevOne could figure out a way to manage the impact of high-frequency polling on the system, that would be very popular."
"The user management features need to be improved. It would be nice if we had more granular control, or layers of control, out of the box."
More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is ranked 27th in Log Management with 9 reviews while IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is ranked 32nd in Log Management with 52 reviews. Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is rated 7.8, while IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) writes "Good logging and tracing but does need more profiling capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) writes "We can get a new vendor certified and monitored in our system significantly faster than before". Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is most compared with AWS X-Ray, Datadog, Azure Monitor, Amazon CloudWatch and Grafana, whereas IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) is most compared with Instana Infrastructure Monitoring, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Splunk Enterprise Security and NETSCOUT nGeniusONE. See our Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) vs. IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM) report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Log 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.
