IBM Cloud Automation Manager vs Red Hat CloudForms comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Turbonomic
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Management
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
204
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (5th), Virtualization Management Tools (2nd), Cloud Analytics (1st), Cloud Cost Management (1st)
IBM Cloud Automation Manager
Ranking in Cloud Management
47th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat CloudForms
Ranking in Cloud Management
9th
Average Rating
6.4
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2024, in the Cloud Management category, the mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 6.3%, up from 6.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Cloud Automation Manager is 0.1%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat CloudForms is 1.6%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Management
Unique Categories:
Cloud Migration
2.9%
Virtualization Management Tools
14.6%
No other categories found
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

DT
Jan 31, 2024
Helps to optimize costs and automate on-prem changes
Rightsizing and right categorization are part of optimization exercises. Turbonomic provides a single platform to help optimize costs and resource efficiency. It provides good visibility of performance at the resource level. This visibility and analytics have helped bridge the data gap between disparate IT teams such as Applications and Infrastructure. The visibility and analytics from Turbonomic have not helped reduce our mean time to resolution. We only used it for cost savings and not optimization. Turbonomic has not impacted our application performance. You can do it if you integrate it with a tool like Dynatrace but not in itself. Turbonomic can optimize the monitoring of public cloud, private cloud, hybrid cloud, and/or Kubernetes. That is where it specializes. With respect to the cloud, their algorithm is pretty good, and their recommendations are relatively trustworthy as compared to other tools. For cloud optimization, it is pretty good. It is also pretty good for balancing on-prem resources. On the on-prem side, we had some automation or scheduling in place. On the cloud side, we did not do any scheduling. On the on-prem side, it would automatically go and make the changes needed, but on the cloud side, we took the recommendations, and we made the changes ourselves. We did not schedule them in the cloud. It is hard to quantify the time saved, but the analysis part is pretty good. We must have saved time and money. Turbonomic helped to optimize costs and automate the changes on-prem. There were savings, but I do not have an exact number because we did it in phases. The first time, there would be more savings, and from the second round, they would slow down because you already reaped the benefit from the first-time recommendations. We did not do all the changes at once, so I do not have the numbers, but typically, any organization would have 20% savings in VMs and disks. Turbonomic does a good job. It depends on how big an organization is, but on average, the tool can cut down the VM cost by 20%.
Use IBM Cloud Automation Manager?
Share your opinion
NA
Nov 22, 2022
Easily integrates with various out-of-the-box or third-party vendors
Our company used the solution as a pre-defined server and internal cloud. We automated infrastructure as a code and delivered it to the user portal to meet logins and request machines.  After the machine was created, we integrated with Ansible Towers to install applications or services that sat on…

Quotes from Members

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."
"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 server. It's not cost-effective if we have to pay more for those. When I move around a VM SQL box with 30 cores and a half-terabyte of RAM, I'm not paying for an entire socket and cores where people assume you have at least 10 or 20 VMs on that socket for that pricing."
"Price is a big one. VMTurbo was very competitively priced."
"What I can advise is to trial the product, taking advantage of the Turbonomic pre-sales implemention support and kickstart training."
"The pricing is in line with the other solutions that we have. It's not a bargain software, nor is it overly expensive."
"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."
"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."
Information not available
"It is definitely cheaper than VMware. Everything is included. There is no challenge there."
"The product's licensing is based on the number of servers."
"Red Hat CloudForms is a bit expensive."
"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 price of Red Hat CloudForms was not competitive, it was expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
No data available
Computer Software Company
24%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
9%
Media Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?
I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company be...
What needs improvement with Turbonomic?
I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can a...
What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?
I mostly provide it to my clients. There are multiple reasons why they would use it depending on the client's needs a...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Red Hat CloudForms?
I am impressed with the product's reports.
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.
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.
 

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
No data available
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
Information Not Available
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)
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Nutanix, IBM and others in Cloud Management. Updated: July 2024.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.