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

NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG vs Opmantek NMIS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
75th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Opmantek NMIS
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
107th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Opmantek NMIS is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG0.5%
Opmantek NMIS0.3%
Other99.2%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

Michael Gideon Genita - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate System Engineer at SMS Global Technologies, Inc.
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…
it_user855840 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Flexible device polling times and extensible modules are key features for me
There are lots of reasons why I'm using it. The installer itself is basically something that can be used as a no-questions-asked type of installer. I can use it with automation tools like Chef and Puppet. I don't have to answer some random questions. I can worry about all that stuff later on in the configuration. It allows for variable polling times of devices on the network. Because it's all in text, in general, that obviously makes it easier from the automation perspective as well, to modify configuration on the fly, using Puppet and those kind of tools. It does have different modules, so you can extend the solution as you need it, or get as little as you need in the beginning, so you don't have to buy a full set of modules. You just buy what you need and expand later on.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"When we have mobile operators who are signal partners, where one is the roaming host and another is the roamer, we are able to see their traffic. Their packets are able to detect if any faults to develop, and at what point they fail."
"We use it for monitoring whenever we update a new circuit or site."
"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."
"It is very rock solid. We hardly have any hardware issues."
"The tool has the ability to look back within a month's data. It is very easy to navigate within the tool and troubleshoot the problem, compared to other solutions that we've used in the past."
"It's an easy product to set up."
"The real-time troubleshooting and application segregation that you can do within it."
"The big thing is the event management engine, which is really, really nice to use, and it comes at a reasonable price, unlike some of the competitors like Netcool from IBM. Those kinds of tools are hugely expensive and they come as resource-heavy types of solutions. This obviously doesn't require as much hardware, but it does offer similar benefits where you can manage all the events."
"It allows for variable polling times of devices on the network. Because it's all in text, in general, that obviously makes it easier from the automation perspective as well, to modify configuration on the fly, using Puppet and those kind of tools."
"In my case, I prefer to only poll interfaces that have descriptions, and the ones that don't have descriptions, I don't really want to know about them. It does allow for all these bits and pieces and adjustments, and fine tuning to get it to a point where it works for my needs."
"It does have different modules, so you can extend the solution as you need it, or get as little as you need in the beginning, so you don't have to buy a full set of modules. You just buy what you need and expand later on."
"The installer itself is basically something that can be used as a no-questions-asked type of installer. I can use it with automation tools like Chef and Puppet. I don't have to answer some random questions. I can worry about all that stuff later on in the configuration."
 

Cons

"There is a timeout feature that we have been asking for awhile."
"The scalability has some limitations and quirks to it. I would like to be able to upgrade rather than replace the whole thing."
"I would like to see an improved level of stitching between IPs."
"We don't use the single pane of glass view, even though we own it."
"Being able to manage the packet flow switches in nGeniusONE would be great."
"I'd like them to make the product more user-friendly."
"The monitoring and reporting tool needs improvement. Users want more information, such as the level of detail when doing a packet analysis. They want more detail to be able to isolate down to a specific point."
"The single pane of glass feed still needs work."
"These kinds of solutions are more node- or device-based solutions. It would be nice in the future if they could be more data-oriented, so it would be easier for me to pull different stats based on ad-hoc requirements; but in a big, centralized database where I can pull specific things, and mix and match the way I want to."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"I would like it to be more scalable with less spend."
"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."
"This product could be cheaper."
"To capture more with the solution that we bought, you have to buy another InfiniStreamNG, and there are only four ports in the back."
"The price is a little high."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
881,821 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
No data available
 

Also Known As

InfiniStreamNG, NETSCOUT ISNG, Infinistream
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

U.S. Department of Defense
Telmex, John Deere, Three Network.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Auvik, Datadog and others in Network Monitoring Software. Updated: February 2026.
881,821 professionals have used our research since 2012.