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

Microsoft DPM vs Rocket Servergraph comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 2025

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

Microsoft DPM
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
28th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Rocket Servergraph
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
96th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of Microsoft DPM is 1.0%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket Servergraph is 0.1%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Nirukshitha Gamage - PeerSpot reviewer
User finds setup straightforward but seeks wider platform support and advanced features
Microsoft DPM could implement backup capabilities for third-party systems such as Linux. They also need to consider other features such as replication to DR sites, similar to what Veeam and other products offer. Microsoft DPM didn't have that capability at that time. If they want to remain competitive in the market, they need to observe the competition and implement improvements. The backup should have compression, deduplication, and DR replication. They should also improve monitoring of the environment. Microsoft DPM didn't have these basics at that time. If they had continued development on the products, they could have reached a higher level, especially given Microsoft's significant presence and majority of servers. Microsoft DPM didn't have any support structure in the backend. If they had a support structure, we could have escalated issues. I never received any support from Microsoft DPM.
it_user728961 - PeerSpot reviewer
The product pays for itself in productivity gain
Customer Service: 10 out of 10. Technical Support: I have not found a company with a better support team in recent years. While other organizations' support have seemed to become less robust, ServerGraph has continues to excel in this area. This is the only organization that I can meet readily with developers, when warranted.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Microsoft DPM?
This solution helps us to manage all of the operations across servers and different workstations.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft DPM?
Microsoft DPM was more affordable for customers compared to other products such as Veritas, which were somewhat expensive. This was one of the main reasons customers chose to purchase Microsoft DPM...
What needs improvement with Microsoft DPM?
Microsoft DPM could implement backup capabilities for third-party systems such as Linux. They also need to consider other features such as replication to DR sites, similar to what Veeam and other p...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

DPM, Data Protection Manager, MS DPM
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Medical Park, Centropol Energy, a.s., NCFE, D & H Distributing, Metalor, Colosseum, a.s., Sanitas S.A., Icebreaker
Albert Einstein Healthcare Network, Celerity Limited, Cristie Nordic, Fiserv
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft DPM vs. Rocket Servergraph and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.