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

Polycom RealPresence Clariti vs Skype for Business comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 3, 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

Polycom RealPresence Clariti
Ranking in Virtual Meetings
12th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Skype for Business
Ranking in Virtual Meetings
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Virtual Meetings category, the mindshare of Polycom RealPresence Clariti is 1.4%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skype for Business is 13.2%, up from 8.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Virtual Meetings
 

Featured Reviews

Sreejith Thulasidas - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides video calling facilities with good video and audio clarity
Polycom RealPresence Clariti is very bad when moving towards the cloud. I think that Microsoft Teams and Zoom have already taken over the market. Polycom is currently looking into more end devices than server components and infrastructure. A cloud version would have been better, but that will not be feasible for Polycom now. It would have been helpful to have a cloud version during the migration stages, but now the time has gone. As a company, it's better for Polycom to look into the video conferencing devices rather than the infrastructure. Earlier, one of the advantages was that the infrastructure was very much open, and it was easy to integrate the tool with other platforms like Cisco. That is not the scenario now, and Polycom should concentrate on the endpoint hardware devices.
Magdalena Teodorczuk - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers great audio and video quality for virtual meetings
I like the instant messaging feature in the product since I prefer to use the chat functionalities provided by the solution. It is easy to integrate the product with some of the other solutions in the market. I rate the integration capabilities of the product a ten out of ten. The product's user interface is user-friendly. I use the product at a personal level, so I can't speak about the support it provides for the maintenance part. I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is its integration with solutions like Zoom and Teams for endpoints. The picture quality is high, and the conference sessions are stable."
"I find the ability to follow the calls, the call flow, the ability to look at the history, and more on the fault-finding tools to be valuable."
"Some proprietary Polycom features include speaker tracking, acoustic fencing, noise cancellation, active noise cancellation, and noise cancellation AI."
"It does a good job of integrating with other software."
"It's on-prem, which is great."
"File sharing and email invitations for a conference. I can have a meeting with people at the opposite end of the Earth, sharing documentation; it is quite easy."
"The ability to mute everyone else is pretty useful when there is a large audience."
"Skype for Business is good for meetings and instant messaging."
"The security seems good."
"Our employees use this solution for a communal space to collaborate for organizational decision making."
"The most valuable feature of Skype for Business is that it has many other tools that you can be integrated with it. It makes the meetings more interactive."
"One of the best features of Skype for Business is that you can set it up on mobile phones, and you can set it up on laptops. You can connect to the tool from anywhere."
"We like the easy provisioning of Skype for Business Conferencing."
 

Cons

"Could have a wider range of use cases."
"The only issue we have is with some of the bridging stuff, particularly with respect to DTMF and outgoing calls."
"Polycom RealPresence Clariti is very bad when moving towards the cloud."
"The most valuable feature is its integration with solutions like Zoom and Teams for endpoints. The picture quality is high, and the conference sessions are stable."
"The customer needs this platform to be a little bit more customized."
"We overcame the audio quality issues by asking users to use the 'Call Me' feature with their desk phone."
"I feel bored with the look and feel of the tool, so it should be changed."
"We would like to better customize our instructions within the Outlook plugin/invite, but we are unable to do so."
"The user experience during long sessions could be improved to avoid issues like intermittent disconnections or login failures."
"The group feature of Skype for Business needs improvement. It should also be improved for online lectures."
"Going forward, I would like to see better call quality and reliability."
"The solution isn't connected to Microsoft Teams, and I feel like there is better communication on that particular solution. The group capabilities are a bit less than Teams."
"I would like to see an updated user interface and layout even though no functionality is missing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Polycom RealPresence Clariti is definitely more expensive than others in the market because of its high quality."
"We purchased an open license."
"Skype for Business' pricing is reasonable."
"The cost of Skype for Business is incorporated into our Office 365 licenses."
"It may be slightly costly, but the features are awesome."
"Our company pays for a license for us to use the solution."
"I use the product's open-source version."
"We have been able to save money by moving our conferencing solution to Skype for Business Conferencing."
"I am using a corporate account for which I have not made any payments."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Virtual Meetings solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Educational Organization
91%
Financial Services Firm
2%
Computer Software Company
1%
Government
1%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Polycom RealPresence Clariti?
They are discontinuing the product and they are moving over to Pexip. The only issue we have is with some of the bridging stuff, particularly with respect to DTMF and outgoing calls. That's our big...
What is your primary use case for Polycom RealPresence Clariti?
We use it both nationally and internationally with our partners, however, it's used in a closed environment.
What advice do you have for others considering Polycom RealPresence Clariti?
I would recommend it, however, it depends on the environment. We have a lot of users but not a lot of usage, so the price model is really good for that environment. Overall, I would give it a nine ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Skype for Business?
Skype for Business is affordable and has decent pricing. The video quality is a bit lower than Teams or Zoom, but it remains a good solution overall.
What needs improvement with Skype for Business?
The video quality could be improved, possibly due to internet connection issues. However, there is no significant weakness in Skype for Business.
 

Also Known As

RealPresence Clariti, Clariti
Skype for Business Plan 1, Skype for Business Plan 2, Lync Server
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Baptist Health Corbin, North Carolina Central University
EmpireCLS Worldwide Chauffeured Services,LA Fitness, MedcoEnergi International, Tampa General Hospital, and HopewellHoldings Limited.
Find out what your peers are saying about Polycom RealPresence Clariti vs. Skype for Business and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.