We performed a comparison between ITRS Geneos and SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I would say that it is an easy-to-use monitoring tool. Amongst the available monitoring tools, it is a really good option."
"The solution's log monitoring and alerting mechanisms are very user-friendly and easy to plug and play."
"It's also easy to implement. The implementation of Geneos is very easy and interesting. It's not complicated. It's very quick to implement. The installation is very easy. There are many topics about ITRS Geneos that explain more about the features of the function of Geneos."
"ITRS uses SNMP to communicate with our devices as well as SNMP net probes installed on our servers."
"It enables us to monitor application processes, to do log-monitoring on a 24/7 basis, to do server-level monitoring - all the hardware parameters - as well as monitor connectivity across applications to the interfaces."
"The ability to build integrations to tools that are not monitored out of the box is the most valuable feature."
"I always appreciate Geneos's stability and ease of use."
"The NetProbe carries over 100 samplers which are capable of monitoring hardware, OS, and the application layer."
"They have instructional videos and other information available on the site to assist you with learning it."
"What people found most valuable in SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer is its report customization feature."
"The program is scalable enough for our usage."
"It helps us know when a branch is down because it has a graphic presentation of all the locations a node represents."
"The monitoring is perfect, showing you the details for the utilization of resources and network bandwidth."
"What my organization likes best about SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer is its easy deployment. It's also well-integrated in terms of monitoring because my organization also uses a SolarWinds solution for monitoring. You can connect SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer directly to that monitoring tool to get information. My organization also finds the default graphs that appear before the configuration in SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer very useful."
"I like that it is able to monitor multiple devices and it's vendor-agnostic."
"What I like the most is the bandwidth assessment."
"It needs to be easier to configure, especially with the JMX plugins."
"There is a part of the rules for monitoring alerts. I want to understand more about how to choose the samples and the requirements for the rules. That is the part that I want to understand better and get better training for."
"Sometimes, if there is a lot of data coming onto the servers, we have observed a little bit of slowness on the gateway servers which are doing the ITRS dashboard monitoring."
"For the solution to stay relevant in the cloud-based monitoring environment Geneos needs more plug-ins with more features. Instead of offering clients workarounds, the solution should have a cloud-based out-of-the-box version."
"A lightweight version which could host more than 100 gateways, as we can see slowness while loading all our gateways."
"Their cloud monitoring solution needs to be improved. I have already given them the feedback that it's not capable of meeting the latest technology needs."
"For the last year or two, I've been asking the vendor about the mobile app. This is something that probably everyone asks when they see the tool and they see how powerful it is. If there is any mobile app for this or if there is any way this tool can be more easily accessible other than having a big client installed, it would be great. I know you can build dashboards, et cetera, but there is no quick and easy way. I should be able to download an app, log in, and see my status. That will put this product above everything else out there. I believe it's on their roadmap."
"The dashboard feature is full of bugs. Grouping items results in a distorted dashboard."
"The price of the solution is a bit high for our clients. They should consider adjusting their price model."
"This solution would benefit from having more security-based communications between the actual devices and the software itself."
"It's not a cheap product, so the pricing could be improved."
"NTA's documentation for the implementation phase needs some enhancement."
"The licensing should be more realistic so that we can adjust the number of nodes according to my needs, rather than in fixed increments."
"SolarWinds' technical support is ok, but it could be faster and more knowledgeable."
"I would like to see better customization capabilities."
"Technical support could be improved with quicker response times."
More SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer Pricing and Cost Advice →
ITRS Geneos is ranked 11th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 57 reviews while SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer is ranked 6th in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) with 34 reviews. ITRS Geneos is rated 8.2, while SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ITRS Geneos writes "The flexible dashboard sets it apart from competing tools, but it's costly and lacks scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer writes "Displays traffic visibility and efficient traffic flows". ITRS Geneos is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Grafana, Datadog and Prometheus, whereas SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer is most compared with Cisco Secure Network Analytics, Zabbix, ManageEngine NetFlow Analyzer, SolarWinds NPM and Darktrace. See our ITRS Geneos vs. SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer report.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.