AWS Cost Management [EOL] vs CloudCheckr comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Spot by NetApp are both solutions in the Cloud Cost Management category. Additionally, 83% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 66% of Spot by NetApp users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between AWS Cost Management [EOL] and CloudCheckr based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, Nutanix and others in Cloud Cost Management.

To learn more, read our detailed Cloud Cost Management Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Cost Management

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,265 peers since 2012

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

IBM Turbonomic

Featured Reviews

Keldric Emery

Advisory System Engineer at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Saves time and costs while reducing performance degradation

It's been a very good solution. The reporting has been very, very valuable as, with a very large environment, it's very hard to get your hands on the environment. Turbonomic does that work for you and really shows you where some of the cost savings can be done. It also helps you with the reporting side. Me being able to see that this machine hasn't been used for a very long time, or seeing that a machine is overused and that it might need more RAM or CPU, et cetera, helps me understand my infrastructure. The cost savings are drastic in the cloud feature in Azure and in AWS. In some of those other areas, I'm able to see what we're using, what we're not using, and how we can change to better fit what we have. It gives us the ability for applications and teams to see the hardware and how it's being used versus how they've been told it's being used. The reporting really helps with that. It shows which application is really using how many resources or the least amount of resources. Some of the gaps between an infrastructure person like myself and an application are filled. It allows us to come to terms by seeing the raw data. This aspect is very important. In the past, it was me saying "I don't think that this application is using that many resources" or "I think this needs more resources." I now have concrete evidence as well as reporting and some different analytics that I can show. It gives me the evidence that I would need to show my application owners proof of what I'm talking about. In terms of the downtime, meantime, and resolution that Turbonomic has been able to show in reports, it has given me an idea of things before things happen. That is important as I would really like to see a machine that needs resources, and get resources to it before we have a problem where we have contention and aspects of that nature. It's been helpful in that regard. Turbonomic has helped us understand where performance risks exist. Turbonomic looks at my environment and at the servers and even at the different hosts and how they're handling traffic and the number of machines that are on them. I can analyze it and it can show me which server or which host needs resources, CPU, or RAM. Even in Azure, in the cloud, I'm able to see which resources are not being used to full capacity and understand where I could scale down some in order to save cost. It is very, very helpful in assessing performance risk by navigating underlying causes and actions. The reason why it's helpful is because if there's a machine that's overrunning the CPU, I can run reports every week to get an idea of machines that would need CPU, RAM, or additional resources. Those resources could be added by Turbonomic - not so much by me - on a scheduled basis. I personally don't have to do it. It actually gives me a little bit of my life back. It helps me to get resources added without me physically having to touch each and every resource myself. Turbonomic has helped to reduce performance degradation in the same way as it's able to see the resources and see what it needs and add them before a problem occurs. It follows the trends. It sees the trends of what's happening and it's able to add or take away those resources. For example, we discuss when we need to do certain disaster recovery tests. Over the years, Turbo will be able to see, for example, around this time of year that certain people ramp up certain resources in an environment, and then it will add the resources as required. Another time of year, it will realize these resources are not being used as much, and it takes those resources away. In this way, it saves money and time while letting us know where we are. We've saved a great deal of time using this product when I consider how I'd have to multiply myself and people like me who would have to add resources to devices or take resources away. We've saved hundreds of hours. Most of the time those hours would have to be after hours as well, which are more valuable to me as that's my personal time. Those saved hours are across months, not years. I would consider the number of resources that Turbonomic is adding and taking away and the placement (if I had to do it all myself) would end up being hundreds of hours monthly that would be added without the help of Turbonomic. It helps us to meet SLAs mainly due to the fact that we're able to keep the servers going and to keep the servers in an environment, to keep them to where (if we need to add resources) we can add them at any given time. It will keep our SLAs where they need to be. If we were to have downtime due to the fact that we had to add resources or take resources away and it was an emergency, then that would prevent us from meeting our SLAs. We also use it to monitor Azure and to monitor our machines in terms of the resources that are out there and the cost involved. In a lot of cases, it does a better job of giving us cost information than Azure itself does. We're able to see the cost per machine. We're able to see the unattached volume and storage that we are paying for. It gives us a great level of insight. Turbonomic gives us the time to be able to focus on innovation and ongoing modernization. Some of the tasks that it does are tasks that I would not necessarily have to do. It's very helpful in that I know that the resources are there where they need to be and it gives me an idea of what changes need to be made or what suggestions it's making. Even if I don't take them, I'm able to get a good idea of some best practices through Turbonomic. One of the ways that Turbonomic does to help bring new resources to market is that we are now able to see the resources (or at least monitor the resources) before they get out to the general public within our environment. We saw immediate value from the product in the test environment. We set it up in a small test environment and we started with just placement and we could tell that the placement was being handled more efficiently than what VMware was doing. There was value for us in placement alone. Then, after we left the placement, we began to look at the resources and there were resources. We immediately began to see a change in the environment. It has made the application and performance better, mainly due to the fact that we are able to give resources and take resources away based on what the need is. Our expenses, definitely, have been in a better place based on the savings that we've been able to make in the cloud and on-prem. Turbonomic has been very helpful in that regard. We've been able to see the savings easily based on the reports in Turbonomic. That, and just seeing the machines that are not being used to capacity allows us to set everything up so it runs a bit more efficiently.

Read full review

SaniyaJeswani

Finance consultant at Accenture

Easy to use and provides in-depth information in one place

I would like to see the forecasting models improved with AWS Cost Management. There is too much of a gap between what AWS forecasts and the actual bills we are charged. It is a machine learning system and relies on more data being collected over time. However, so far, we have not seen that.

Read full review

Nigel Mullings

Enterprise Cloud Architect at Peritem Consultants Ltd

Beneficial granular reporting, highly stable, and excellent support

I have worked in the cost-management tools from many cloud providers, such as Amazon AWS, Google Cloud Services, and Azure. CloudCheckr CMx High Security has a lot more detail than the native cloud service cost-management tools. If you want an enterprise-grade solution, CloudCheckr CMx High Security would be a good fit. If you want something simple, out of the box, then you can use the cloud service's native tools.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the analytics that help us optimize compatibility. Whereas Azure Advisor tells us what we have to do, Turbonomic has automation which actually does those things. That means we don't have to be present to get them done and simplifies our IT engineers' jobs."

"The tool provides the ability to look at the consumption utilization over a period of time and determine if we need to change that resource allocation based on the actual workload consumption, as opposed to how IT has configured it. Therefore, we have come to realize that a lot of our workloads are overprovisioned, and we are spending more money in the public cloud than we need to."

"The most valuable features are the cluster utilization reports and the resource capacity planning. We can simulate how much capacity we can add to the current resources. The individual DM reports and VM-facing recommendations report are also helpful."

"Rightsizing is valuable. Its recommendations are pretty good."

"The automation and orchestration components are definitely the best part, as you can tell it what it can do and when, and just let it be."

"It became obvious to us that there was a lot more being offered in the product that we could leverage to ensure our VMware environment was running efficiently."

"The proactive monitoring of all our open enrollment applications has improved our organization. We have used it to size applications that we are moving to the cloud. Therefore, when we move them out there, we have them appropriately sized. We use it for reporting to current application owners, showing them where they are wasting money. There are easy things to find for an application, e.g., they decommissioned the server, but they never took care of the storage. Without a tool like this, that storage would just sit there forever, with us getting billed for it."

"With over 2500 ESX VMs, including 1500+ XenDesktop VDI desktops, hosted over two datacentres and 80+ vSphere hosts, firefighting has become something of the past."

More IBM Turbonomic pros

"The initial setup was straightforward. It's not complex at all."

"The product provides the ability to set cost limits and budgets for a set of resources on the network."

"The tool's cost management feature provides a comprehensive view of AWS costs, allowing us to plan and make cost-effective decisions. With AWS Cost Explorer, we can perform cost planning, generate recommendations, and provide clients with suggestions for resizing. This feature includes data filtering and protection, offering users insights into spending patterns through AWS spending patterns and planning tools. The product is easy to learn."

"The budgeting tool of AWS Cost Management is the most valuable feature."

"AWS Cost Management is good for providing in-depth information in one place."

"The initial setup wasn't complex at all."

"All of the reporting features are very good, as they allow us to track monthly expenses and send relevant emails."

"I like the recommendation we get from AWS Cost Management to use a particular image or VM type."

More AWS Cost Management [EOL] pros

"The solution is scalable for our purposes."

"It will automatically suggest areas for optimization."

"The recommendation section is pretty helpful."

"It's one of the leading players for cloud optimization. It's hard to find anything better."

"The initial setup is straightforward."

"The solution is mostly stable."

"The best feature I like about CloudCheckr CMx High Security is its simplicity. I love that it's not rocket science to use the solution. Even if you're not familiar with the cloud, you can easily figure out how to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You can use AWS, you can use Azure, and you can use GCP with the solution because the integration is quite simple. You can also use multi-cloud with it, and you could see the billing part. You'll have complete visibility into your cost which I love about the solution. I also love that data on any security issues and vulnerabilities are available on the go with CloudCheckr CMx High Security. You don't need to do anything different. Just run the scan and you'll have all these open findings in the tool, in terms of the priority level, so if it's critical, it will tell you, "It's critical," and you need to fix it right away."

"The most valuable feature of CloudCheckr CMx High Security is granular reporting. Additionally, the user interface is easy to use."

Cons

"The deployment process is a little tricky. It wasn't hard for me because I have pretty in-depth knowledge of Kubernetes, and their software runs on Kubernetes. To deploy it or upgrade it, you have to be able to follow steps and use the Kubernetes command line, or you'll need someone to come in and do it for you."

"Turbonomic can modernize the look and feel, making it more user-friendly to access and obtain information."

"Turbonomic doesn't do storage placement how I would prefer. We use multiple shared storage volumes on VMware, so I don't have one big disk. I have lots of disks that I can place VMs on, and that consumes IOPS from the disk subsystem. We were getting recommendations to provision a new volume."

"The way it handles updates needs to be improved."

"I would like Turbonomic to add more services, especially in the cloud area. I have already told them this. They can add Azure NetApp Files. They can add Azure Blob storage. They have already added Azure App service, but they can do more."

"We don't use Turbonomic for FinOps and part of the reason is its cost reporting. The reporting could be much more robust and, if that were the case, I could pitch it for FinOps."

"It sometimes does get false positives. Sometimes, it'll move something when it really wasn't a performance metric. I've seen it do that, but it's pretty much an automated tool for performance. We've only got about 500 virtual machines, so lots of times, I'm able to manage it physically, but it's definitely a nice tool for a larger enterprise that might be managing 2,000 or 3,000 virtual machines."

"There is room for improvement [with] upgrades. We have deployed the newer version, version 8 of Turbonomic. The problem is that there is no way to upgrade between major Turbonomic versions. You can upgrade minor versions without a problem, but when you go from version 6 to version 7, or version 7 to version 8, you basically have to deploy it new and let it start gathering data again. That is a problem because all of the data, all of the savings calculations that had been done on the old version, are gone. There's no way to keep track of your lifetime savings across versions."

More IBM Turbonomic cons

"There could be an option to build custom dashboards for the platform."

"We need finer-grained control over the roles and policies for users, specifying their permissions as to what they can look at."

"The solution needs to improve the communication mechanism available to the stakeholders."

"AWS could improve the compatibility with other products."

"Data transfer between S3 buckets within AWS incurs costs, especially when moving data from one bucket to another or downloading data."

"AWS Cost Management has fewer features compared to Azure Cost Management."

"I would like to see AWS Cost Management be more precise in their calculations."

"I would like to see the forecasting models improved with AWS Cost Management."

More AWS Cost Management [EOL] cons

"The solution needs to work better with larger capacities of data."

"The solution must improve its user interface."

"Self-healing could be a bit smoother and a bit cleaner, easier to access and more functional. That would help."

"The performance of the tool really needs to be improved."

"The reporting and analytic capabilities are very limited."

"What needs to be improved in CloudCheckr CMx High Security is integration. All the clouds are going quite fast, for example, all the cloud providers: Microsoft, Google, etc. CloudCheckr CMx High Security is good with AWS, no doubt about it, but with Azure and Google Cloud, I find that the solution is slow in that direction. If the vendor planned for CloudCheckr CMx High Security to be automated just for AWS, then it does make sense. If not, if the vendor is also targeting good integration with Google and Microsoft, then CloudCheckr CMx High Security integration needs improvement, in particular, it has to be faster. At the moment, its integration with Azure is not as good as its integration with AWS. With GCP, integration is nowhere."

"Many features still need to be implemented in this tool."

"CloudCheckr CMx High Security is complex. There are a lot of menus, and if you do not know what you are looking for you can get lost. However, the interface is self-explanatory. It's easy to understand where to go to get what you want."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I have not seen Turbonomic's new pricing since IBM purchased it. When we were looking at it in my previous company before IBM's purchase, it was compatible with other tools."

"I don't know the current prices, but I like how the licensing is based on the number of instances instead of sockets, clusters, or cores. We have some VMs that are so heavy I can only fit four on one server. It's not cost-effective if we have to pay more for those. When I move around a VM SQL box with 30 cores and a half-terabyte of RAM, I'm not paying for an entire socket and cores where people assume you have at least 10 or 20 VMs on that socket for that pricing."

"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."

"It is an endpoint type license, which is fine. It is not overly expensive."

"It's worth the time and money investment if you can afford it."

"The pricing and licensing are fair. We purchase based on benchmark pricing, which we have been able to get. There are no surprise charges nor hidden fees."

"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."

"IBM Turbonomic is an investment that we believe will deliver positive returns."

More IBM Turbonomic pricing and cost advice

"The tool's pricing depends on our services."

"The product is affordable."

"AWS Cost Management is free to use."

"We have signed a long-term contract with AWS. There are different service levels that will determine the level of support you have."

"We get AWS Cost Management for free because we use AWS services."

"The solution is reasonably priced."

"A license is needed to use CloudCheckr CMx High Security, but because we are a managed service provider, the price of the license would vary. It depends on the type of cloud users we have, for example, it would be some type of percentage or monthly billing, etc."

"The cost is on par with other providers."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Cost Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

University

Computer Software Company

20%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Turbonomic?

The implementation could be enhanced.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?

We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting...

See all answers

What do you like most about AWS Cost Management?

The tool's cost management feature provides a comprehensive view of AWS costs, allowing us to plan and make cost-effe...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS Cost Management?

The tool's pricing depends on our services.

See all answers

What needs improvement with AWS Cost Management?

Data transfer between S3 buckets within AWS incurs costs, especially when moving data from one bucket to another or d...

See all answers

What do you like most about CloudCheckr ?

The recommendation section is pretty helpful.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudCheckr ?

The price depends on the actual Azure consumption and what we feed into it. The cost is on par with other providers.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudCheckr ?

We are not happy with the product’s reporting capabilities. We are planning to change the solution. The security comp...

See all answers

Comparisons

VMware Aria Operations vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 19% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 13% of the time

VMware vSphere vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 9% of the time

Cisco Intersight vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 9% of the time

Cloudability vs IBM Turbonomic

Compared 7% of the time

More IBM Turbonomic Competitors

Cloudability vs AWS Cost Management [EOL]

Compared 52% of the time

Nutanix Cloud Manager (NCM) vs AWS Cost Management [EOL]

Compared 48% of the time

More AWS Cost Management [EOL] Competitors

Cloudability vs CloudCheckr

Compared 20% of the time

Apptio One vs CloudCheckr

Compared 18% of the time

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs CloudCheckr

Compared 14% of the time

Azure Cost Management vs CloudCheckr

Compared 12% of the time

Flexera Cloud Cost Management vs CloudCheckr

Compared 11% of the time

More CloudCheckr Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Turbonomic

January 2025

Download IBM Turbonomic product report

Buyer's Guide

AWS Cost Management [EOL]

January 2025

Download AWS Cost Management [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

CloudCheckr

January 2025

Download CloudCheckr product report

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager

Amazon Cost Management

CloudCheckr CMx High Security, CloudCheckr CMP

Learn More

Video not available

IBM

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Video not available

Spot by NetApp

Interactive Demo

IBM

Demo not available

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Demo not available

Spot by NetApp

Overview

IBM Turbonomic is a performance and cost optimization platform for public, private, and hybrid clouds used by companies to assure application performance while eliminating inefficiencies by dynamically resourcing applications through automated actions.

IBM Turbonomic leverages AI to continuously analyze application resource consumption, deliver insights and dashboards, and make real-time adjustments. Common use cases include cloud cost optimization, cloud migration planning, data center modernization, FinOps acceleration, Kubernetes optimization, sustainable IT, and application resource management. By integrating with various cloud platforms, on-premise infrastructures, and containers, IBM Turbonomic provides a holistic view of the environment, ensuring that resources are allocated efficiently.

The solution is designed to support complex IT environments, offering actionable insights and automated actions that help IT teams proactively manage application performance and infrastructure resources. Turbonomic customers report an average 33% reduction in cloud and infrastructure waste without impacting application performance, and return-on-investment of 471% over three years.

IBM Turbonomic manages resources across hybrid and on-premises data centers to ensure efficiency and financial impact awareness. It automates resource allocation, balances memory dynamically, and provides robust performance metrics. Users benefit from its ability to prevent resource starvation and offer cost-saving recommendations through continuous management. Executive Dashboards provide insights for cost justification and resource management, making IT operations simpler with AI-driven automation and actionable recommendations.

What are the most important features of IBM Turbonomic?

Automated Resource Allocation: Dynamically allocates resources for optimal performance.
Dynamic Memory Balancing: Adjusts memory allocation to prevent resource shortages.
Right-Sizing: Sizes VMs accurately for Azure and on-prem environments.
Single Platform Management: Manages resources across hybrid and on-premises data centers.
Proactive Performance Optimization: Continuously optimizes performance to prevent issues.
Kubernetes Support: Enhances container management with robust support.
Cost-Saving Recommendations: Provides actionable tips for reducing expenses.

What benefits should users look for in IBM Turbonomic reviews?

Cost Reduction: Helps minimize expenses through efficient resource management.
Performance Improvement: Enhances application performance by preventing resource starvation.
Detailed Insights: Offers comprehensive analytics to justify costs and resource utilization.
Simplified IT Processes: Uses AI automation to streamline operations.

IBM Turbonomic is implemented across multiple industries, including finance for optimizing peak payroll processing, IT for enhanced virtual server management, and healthcare for reliable performance monitoring. Organizations benefit from its robust automation, ensuring maximum efficiency and cost savings.

AWS Cost Management tools give you visibility into your AWS costs and usage. There are a range of AWS Cost Management tools to help you access, organize, understand, control, and optimize your costs.

CloudCheckr CMx High Security is a cloud management platform that provides complete visibility into cost and security issues. The primary use cases are day-to-day operations, cloud management, identifying open vulnerabilities and issues from a security perspective, and cost management and optimization.

The solution is praised for its stability, simplicity, ease of use, scalability, excellent technical support, and granular reporting. CloudCheckr CMx High Security provides priority-level data on security issues and vulnerabilities, making it easy to identify critical issues that need immediate attention.

Sample Customers

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.

Hess, Expedia, Kelloggs, Philips, HyperTrack

Accenture, Logitech, Ingram, Cloudar, Infor, DXC, Cornell University, DLT, Lumen, Lightstream, Choice Hotels, B-Tech, SmileShark, PTP, Explicity, JCH Technology, Siemens Mobility

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Cost Management

January 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Microsoft, Nutanix and others in Cloud Cost Management. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Cloud Cost Management vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Cost Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.