We performed a comparison between IBM Turbonomic and Nutanix Move 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."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."
"My favorite part of the solution is the automation scheduling. Being able to choose when actions happen, and how they happen..."
"The ability to monitor and automate both the right-sizing of VMs as well as to automate the vMotion of VMs across ESXi hosts."
"We like that Turbonomic shows application metrics and estimates the impact of taking a suggested action. It provides us a map of resource utilization as part of its recommendation. We evaluate and compare that to what we think would be appropriate from a human perspective to that what Turbonomic is doing, then take the best action going forward."
"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.'"
"It is a good holistic platform that is easy to use. It works pretty well."
"We can manage multiple environments using a single pane of glass, which is something that I really like."
"We have seen a 30% performance improvement overall."
"The most valuable feature of Nutanix Move is its simplicity."
"It is easy to set up the solution."
"The most valuable feature of Nutanix Move is how simple it is and the benefit of what it does."
"The solution is stable."
"The easy migration is the most valuable feature."
"There is room for improvement [with] upgrades. We have deployed the newer version, version 8 of Turbonomic. The problem is that there is no way to upgrade between major Turbonomic versions. You can upgrade minor versions without a problem, but when you go from version 6 to version 7, or version 7 to version 8, you basically have to deploy it new and let it start gathering data again. That is a problem because all of the data, all of the savings calculations that had been done on the old version, are gone. There's no way to keep track of your lifetime savings across versions."
"We're still evaluating the solution, so I don't know enough about what I don't know. They've done a lot over the years. I used Turbonomics six or seven years ago before IBM bought them. They've matured a lot since then."
"The way it handles updates needs to be improved."
"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 automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer."
"The planning and costing areas could be a little bit more detailed. When you have more than 2,000 machines, the reports don't work properly. They need to fix it so that the reports work when you use that many virtual machines."
"The old interface was not the clearest UI in some areas, and could be quite intimidating when first using the tool."
"I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can add Azure NetApp Files. They can add Azure Blob storage. They have already added Azure App service, but they can do more."
"We'd like Nutanix to be more flexible in the future."
"Nutanix Move could be made more scalable, so you could do more instead of taking five or ten VMs at a time."
"The most valuable feature is the automation. The solution will clone the data that you want to migrate, shut down the virtual machine, disconnect it from the network and start the clone virtual machine inside the solution's platform."
"They should have some tools to migrate the workload from another Nutanix platform."
"We can migrate from Hyper-V to Acropolis, but we can't move from Acropolis back to Hyper-V. However, we do not have customers who want to, but if we could reassure them that it was possible it would be better. Having our Hyper-V customers have a two-way option that may help. A customer would like to hear that if they do switch they can switch back. I know it's a limitation on Hyper-V but not a limitation on VMware."
IBM Turbonomic is ranked 4th in Cloud Migration with 204 reviews while Nutanix Move is ranked 10th in Cloud Migration with 5 reviews. IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8, while Nutanix Move is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "The solution reduced our operational expenditures and is able to identify points before we even noticed them ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nutanix Move writes "A highly stable and simple solution used to effectively migrate VMs". IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Azure Cost Management, Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth and VMware vSphere, whereas Nutanix Move is most compared with Carbonite Migrate and Nasuni. See our IBM Turbonomic vs. Nutanix Move 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.
