Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

LiveAction LiveNX vs NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 10, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

LiveAction LiveNX
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
44th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
IT Infrastructure Monitoring (48th)
NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
78th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of LiveAction LiveNX is 0.7%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG is 0.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Ashwani Bansal - PeerSpot reviewer
Network management and diagnostics improved through effective monitoring and reporting capabilities
The solution is handy. I have not used that particular feature. Maintenance is required for the system. If you want to use something on the endpoints or end-user devices, then using LiveAction LiveNX in place of other tools would be quite beneficial. The solution impacts operational costs and resources. On a scale of 1-10, I rate LiveAction LiveNX a nine.
Michael Gideon Genita - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to set up with good documentation and helpful support
I'm using it for a customer The packet flow switch is the most valuable aspect of the solution.  It's an easy product to set up. We can scale the solution if we need to. It's stable.  The documentation is well-written and quite useful. It's compatible with other products.  Under the pocket flow…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its analytical capability is really good."
"The intention and the idea of the filter is great."
"On a scale of 1-10, I rate LiveAction LiveNX a nine."
"The product has a very good graphical interface."
"The alerting feature is very good because it allows you to set MOS alerts at various network junctures or data points."
"We don't have any complaints about the software. According to my team, it's a very good tool that's very intuitive."
"All in all, LiveAction LiveNX has become an indispensable tool for maintaining and improving our network's reliability and performance, ultimately supporting our organization's goal of providing timely and dependable delivery services."
"One of the valuable features is the ability to create CLI scripts on the fly to fix any issues. We were using it for QoS modeling to ensure that we were properly modeling QoS, and it basically said here is what you need to fix to get this QoS done, whether it is ACL or something else. It would either push or recommend. If you have the right credentials, you could also push. It is very good if you are a Cisco shop. It gives you reporting, latency, and bandwidth utilization for your applications, so you can do good capacity management planning. There are a lot of pieces that LiveNX can give you. It is a total NPM solution for SD-WAN."
"It helps us to assist our customers to isolate problems. If it is us who is having the problem, then we can use it to streamline the process."
"It has cut our troubleshooting down by days. Once we have a product in place, we show people examples of how it can streamline their troubleshooting process."
"I love the single pane of glass view. It makes it easier to not have to navigate everywhere. It allows more simplistic visibility, without having to go from tool to tool to tool, or from window to window to window."
"It helps us get to root cause quickly. With utilization and consumption of bandwidth, we can usually see what application is taking as much as they should (or shouldn't), then account for it accordingly."
"We use it for monitoring whenever we update a new circuit or site."
"The real-time troubleshooting and application segregation that you can do within it."
"The product is stable. I have never had any issue where we have lost an InfiniStream, or visibility from that particular InfiniStream, throughout the bank."
"It's an easy product to set up."
 

Cons

"The only downside to this software is the price."
"The tool crashes sometimes when we try to pull reports simultaneously."
"Sometimes the solution does not register devices properly and that is a bug."
"The product is weak in multi-tenancy. We have to install multiple instances of LiveAction, whereas we would like to build it once for our customers."
"Improved documentation and more responsive customer support can help in addressing issues faster."
"This is a horrible solution and I think everything needs to be improved."
"They need to create a more simplified UI."
"It is not as robust as other NPM solutions. For instance, there is a problem while labeling specific applications. It works well with well-known applications, but when you have to put in new applications that are not very known and set them up with names, ports, URLs, or some protocols, it is not as intuitive."
"I would like to see an improved level of stitching between IPs."
"Being able to manage the packet flow switches in nGeniusONE would be great."
"The NetFlow Collectors could handle more flows per minute."
"Only problems that we have had are fiber issues going into the TAPs or vSTREAMs, which are usually local site issues."
"We don't use the single pane of glass view, even though we own it."
"It's not able to communicate with our probes."
"The single pane of glass feed still needs work."
"There is a timeout feature that we have been asking for awhile."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is fairly expensive compared to other products."
"It's very expensive."
"We use the free version."
"To capture more with the solution that we bought, you have to buy another InfiniStreamNG, and there are only four ports in the back."
"This product could be cheaper."
"The price is a little high."
"It can be scalable. It just costs too much. With a company as big as ours, it gets too expensive to accommodate every single site."
"I would like it to be more scalable with less spend."
"The scalability is good, but it comes at a cost. E.g., if you need 100 InfiniStream because you are sending gigs or terabytes of data to one InfiniStream, then you will have to purchase another InfiniStream, which are not cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
10%
Real Estate/Law Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about LiveAction LiveNX?
The product has a very good graphical interface.
What needs improvement with LiveAction LiveNX?
In my use cases, I do not see any improvements needed. The solution could potentially integrate with Azure, AWS, and multi-cloud networks.
What is your primary use case for LiveAction LiveNX?
For observability, I use ThousandEyes, LiveSP, and LiveAction LiveNX for service provider networks. I am actually a service provider, and I use it for my SD-WAN clients. I usually use it with my en...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

LiveNX
InfiniStreamNG, NETSCOUT ISNG, Infinistream
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Tampa Electric, Digital First Media, Allscripts, Boxwood Technology
U.S. Department of Defense
Find out what your peers are saying about LiveAction LiveNX vs. NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.