We performed a comparison between Azure Cost Management and IBM Turbonomic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Cost Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution helps us diagnose and understand why some resources cost more so that we can fine-tune and reduce the cost."
"The most valuable feature is that it helps us to better forecast and reduce costs."
"What I like the most about Azure Cost Management is that it's similar to a native service, and it has very well-defined product features, particularly if a customer is moving to Azure, then it gives proper insight in terms of compatibility and what benefits a customer can get from the solution."
"The cost analysis and exportability are the most valuable features of the solution."
"Microsoft's technical support is good."
"Gives visibility into the cost of cloud-based solutions."
"Azure Cost Management is user-friendly compared to other competitors."
"I like the granularity of the tools."
"We have VM placement in Automated mode and currently have all other metrics in Recommend mode."
"Using this product helps us to reduce performance risk because it shows us where resources are needed but not yet allocated."
"We can manage multiple environments using a single pane of glass, which is something that I really like."
"My favorite part of the solution is the automation scheduling. Being able to choose when actions happen, and how they happen..."
"It also brings up a list of machines and if something is under-provisioned and needs more compute power it will tell you, 'This server needs more compute power, and we suggest you raise it up to this level.' It will even automatically do it for you. In Azure, you don't have to actually go into the cloud provider to resize. You can just say, 'Apply these resizes,' and Turbonomic uses some back-end APIs to make the changes for you."
"The recommendation of the family types is a huge help because it has saved us a lot of money. We use it primarily for that. Another thing that Turbonomic provides us with is a single platform that manages the full application stack and that's something I really like."
"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."
"We have a system where our developers automate machine builds, and that is constantly running out of resources. Turbonomic helps us with that, so I don't have to keep buying hardware. The developers always say, "They don't have enough. They don't have enough. They don't have enough," when they just configured it improperly. Therefore, Turbonomic helps us identify configuration issues on their side so it doesn't cost me money on the other end to buy resources that I don't really need."
"I would like the developers to add more features about migration, like how much it would cost to migrate from, let's say, AWS to Azure."
"Azure Cost Management needs to improve scalability."
"Be wary of unnecessary costs."
"We lack a resource and ID login."
"The initial setup is a little bit complex."
"The solution's technical support should be faster, more knowledgeable, and customer-friendly."
"Improved integration with other solutions could definitely be beneficial."
"Azure Cost Management should be made cheaper."
"Since the introduction of a HTML 5 based interface, our main - but minor - criticism of a less than intuitive operation managers' GUI would be the area of improvement."
"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."
"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."
"It can be more agnostic in terms of the solutions that it provides. It can include some other cost-saving methods for the public cloud and SaaS applications as well."
"If they would educate their customers to understand the latest updates, that would help customers... Also, there are a lot of features that are not available in Turbonomic. For example, PaaS component optimization and automation are still in the development phase."
"I do not like Turbonomic's new licensing model. The previous model was pretty straightforward, whereas the new model incorporates what most of the vendors are doing now with cores and utilization. Our pricing under the new model will go up quite a bit. Before, it was pretty straightforward, easy to understand, and reasonable."
"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."
"Before IBM bought it, the support was fantastic. After IBM bought it, the support became very disappointing."
Azure Cost Management is ranked 2nd in Cloud Cost Management with 41 reviews while IBM Turbonomic is ranked 1st in Cloud Cost Management with 204 reviews. Azure Cost Management is rated 8.0, while IBM Turbonomic is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure Cost Management writes "A good, but limited cost information solution with strong analytics but requiring more flexibility in its reporting functionality". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Turbonomic writes "The solution reduced our operational expenditures and is able to identify points before we even noticed them ". Azure Cost Management is most compared with Cloudability, AWS Savings Plans, VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth, Zabbix and Datadog, whereas IBM Turbonomic is most compared with VMware Aria Operations, Cisco Intersight, VMWare Tanzu CloudHealth, VMware vSphere and Cloudability. See our Azure Cost Management vs. IBM Turbonomic report.
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.
