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

Parquantix vs Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Turbonomic
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Cost Management
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
205
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (5th), Cloud Management (4th), Virtualization Management Tools (3rd), Cloud Analytics (1st)
Parquantix
Ranking in Cloud Cost Management
34th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Turbo360 (Formerly Serverle...
Ranking in Cloud Cost Management
26th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (81st), Cloud Management (64th), Cloud Monitoring Software (46th)
 

Featured Reviews

SubashSubbiah - PeerSpot reviewer
Dec 10, 2022
It can tell us where performance is lagging on the hardware layer, but the reporting on the application layer is lacking
The automation area could be improved, and the generic reports are poor. We want more details in the analysis report from the application layer. The reports from the infrastructure layer are satisfactory, but Turbonomic won't provide much information if we dig down further than the application layer. I would like them to add some apps for physical device load resourcing and physical-to-virtual calculation. It gives excellent recommendations for the virtual layer but doesn't have the capabilities for physical-to-virtual analysis. Automated deployment is something else they could add. Some built-in automation features are helpful, but we aren't effectively using a few. We want a few more automated features, like autoscaling and automatic performance optimization testing would be useful.
Use Parquantix?
Share your opinion
MS
May 13, 2022
Centralized, great for performing corrective actions and has a helpful Business Activity Monitoring module
We used the product mainly to manage our more than five different Azure services that were in our production environment.  Serverless360 also stands out with its ability to track the flow of messages across your applications involving different Azure and on-premise services, visualize the data…

Quotes from Members

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You should understand the cost of your physical servers and how much time and money you are spending year over year on expanding your virtual farm."
"Contact the Turbonomic sales team, explain your needs and what you're looking to monitor. They will get a pre-sales SE on the phone and together work up a very accurate quote."
"What I can advise is to trial the product, taking advantage of the Turbonomic pre-sales implemention support and kickstart training."
"It was an annual buy-in. You basically purchase it based on your host type stuff. The buy-in was about 20K, and the annual maintenance is about $3,000 a year."
"I know there have been some issues with the billing, when the numbers were first proposed, as to how much we would save. There was a huge miscommunication on our part. Turbonomic was led to believe that we could optimize our AWS footprint, because we didn't know we couldn't. So, we were promised savings of $750,000. Then, when we came to implement Turbonomic, the developers in AWS said, "Absolutely not. You're not putting that in our environment. We can't scale down anything because they coded it." Our AWS environment is a legacy environment. It has all these old applications, where all the developers who have made it are no longer with the company. Those applications generate a ton of money for us. So, if one breaks, we are really in trouble and they didn't want to have to deal with an environment that was changing and couldn't be supported. That number went from $750,000 to about $450,000. However, that wasn't Turbonomic's fault."
"In the last year, Turbonomic has reduced our cloud costs by $94,000."
"If you're a super-small business, it may be a little bit pricey for you... But in large, enterprise companies where money is, maybe, less of an issue, Turbonomic is not that expensive. I can't imagine why any big company would not buy it, for what it does."
"Everybody tells me the pricing is high. But the ROIs are great."
Information not available
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Cost Management solutions are best for your needs.
812,580 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Healthcare Company
6%
No data available
Computer Software Company
41%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Real Estate/Law Firm
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?
It offers different scenarios. It provides more capabilities than many other tools available. Typically, its price is...
What needs improvement with Turbonomic?
The implementation could be enhanced.
What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?
We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
No data available
Serverless360
 

Learn More

Video not available
Video not available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
Information Not Available
MSC, Transalta, Rank Group, RACQ, BBC, Q2 Solutions, Middleway, BUPA, Columbia Sportswear, EDF
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, Nutanix and others in Cloud Cost Management. Updated: September 2024.
812,580 professionals have used our research since 2012.