We performed a comparison between ITRS Geneos and Zabbix 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."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"I always appreciate Geneos's stability and ease of use."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features of ITRS Geneos is the active time feature that helps with the trading applications that I support."
"One of the best aspects of Geneos is that it has a broad scope and can cover a lot of use cases. You can write your own scripts to monitor really specific things. And the rules that you can put in place can be quite complex for the alerts."
"One thing we're utilizing in Geneos is the Gateway-SQL. That's really helpful for us. Using Gateway-SQL, we are able to merge two different views into one. Suppose we have to check something in the log and that we have to check something in the database and do a comparison before publishing a result. We can achieve that using Gateway-SQL."
"ITRS can define rules to alert when certain parameters that you monitor breach a threshold. Rules can be configured to fire recovery actions automatically to clear the alert"
"I would say that it is an easy-to-use monitoring tool. Amongst the available monitoring tools, it is a really good option."
"The ability to build integrations to tools that are not monitored out of the box is the most valuable feature."
"Zabbix helps to save time."
"Zabbix can use old data to current data to set the threshold. We can use previous data to set the threshold."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides network segregation for server monitoring."
"The flexibility of this solution is amazing."
"Zabbix is quite stable once it is set up. We haven't had any post-setup issues."
"I really enjoy network traffic triggers that allow us to check traffic threshold from ISP."
"In terms of customization and integration, we have more flexibility. We can automate configurations, define deletion rules, and customize based on the needs. The client interface allows for further configuration, making it quite comprehensive."
"The most valuable features in Zabbix are those that help us overcome bottlenecks in CPU usage, as well as reduce memory delay. I know that we have only reached the tip of the iceberg of what Zabbix's features can do for us, and we have not used all of them yet."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"ITRS Geneos is not on the cloud at a time when everyone is moving to the cloud."
"Data visualization – real time and historical – is a weakness."
"There is one drawback to using lightweight data collection: we lack the feature of observability based on time series, such as historical model data. This makes it difficult to view data in ITRS. ITRS needs to improve this feature."
"One thing that could be improved in terms of rapid scaling would be more ability to clone aspects of an implementation. It seems like there are opportunities in this area, where we have repetitive tasks to do when it comes to implementing things on new servers or on new gateways. It would be great if there was an easy way to clone something that had already been done."
"At the moment Geneos is excellent and handling real time monitoring, however not great at doing historical reporting."
"It needs to be easier to configure, especially with the JMX plugins."
"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."
"ITRS Geneos cloud monitoring is very weak and can use improvement."
"The dashboard and the graph section could be a little bit more professional."
"Zabbix does not draw automatic mapping of the network, this is something they should add in the future. There is a lot of effort that is involved in tailoring some of the settings which could be made easier."
"Zabbix technical support is sold separately."
"The user interface could be better."
"Zabbix can use better documentation and support for troubleshooting."
"The main problem with Zabbix is that you have to spend time writing templates for all of the products that you have."
"The solution needs to add features for finding loopholes or problems and their root causes."
"In the next release, I'm hoping for features targeted towards larger users with more customizable options. Despite this, I think pre-canned reports that can be used straight out of the box would be beneficial rather than having to configure each report individually. Additionally, a deeper dive into software configurations on the machines would be useful, although I understand there may be challenges in implementing this due to scripting requirements. More documentation would also be appreciated."
ITRS Geneos is ranked 11th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 57 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 10th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 98 reviews. ITRS Geneos is rated 8.2, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. 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 Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". ITRS Geneos is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Grafana and Prometheus, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, SolarWinds NPM, Nagios XI and Nagios Core. See our ITRS Geneos vs. Zabbix report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
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.