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

Azure Monitor vs OmniPeek comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

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

Azure Monitor
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
54
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Monitoring Software (5th)
OmniPeek
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
66th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (73rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Azure Monitor is 7.5%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OmniPeek is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Syed Abid  - PeerSpot reviewer
Monthly and weekly resource monitoring has improved efficiency
Azure Monitor can improve by adding some kind of storage for logs. I can get the runtime logs alone, yet if Azure Monitor can independently add one gigabyte, two gigabytes, or five gigabytes at least to log storage, I can fix the logs without syncing with Log Analytics Workspace and Sentinel. If they do that, and if they can integrate a little pricing adjustment, it will be profitable for the Microsoft tool.
Kunwar Preet Singh Sodhi - PeerSpot reviewer
User-friendly, stable, and scalable
The solution's automation has room for improvement. I have observed that Wireshark is much more commonly used for automation than OmniPeek. This is because when scripts are involved, Wireshark provides a great deal of flexibility for automating the process of packet sniffing. In the case of OmniPeek, its capabilities are limited, which restricts its automation potential. However, it is already user-friendly and compatible with Microsoft, so if it were to become comparable to Wireshark, it could potentially dominate the market. I have seen many new versions of OmniPeek, but I have never seen an automation version. The price of OmniPeek can be improved. Many customers have chosen the solution due to its user-friendly nature, but the cost often prevents them from making a purchase. This means that they may opt for an open-source tool instead. We should look into making the pricing more competitive and consider offering customization options to increase its utility in automation. This could be a game-changer.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Azure Monitor is useful because of the useful application insights and telemetry, such as metrics and logs."
"Azure Monitor is really just a source for Dynatrace. It's just collecting data and monitoring the environment and the infrastructure. It is fairly good at that."
"Azure Monitor is very stable."
"In the last company where I worked about a year ago, it looked very simple."
"Azure Monitor's best features are its graphs and charts, the different visibility options, and reporting."
"It allows you to set thresholds on the metrics and receive alerts."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek is the ability to assign custom color codes to the different packets easily."
"It's a solid piece of software. It's stable."
"The most valuable feature is OmniPeek is user-friendly."
"I believe the most crucial feature of OmniPeek search is the ability to sniff packets based on channel switching."
"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek was the ability it gave us to see the connection procedure."
"The most valuable features are the voice bot, which checks the quality of service for voice, and the expert view that gives me insight on what and where to troubleshoot."
 

Cons

"The solution's monitoring feature has limitations for analyzing multiple metrics."
"I need connectivity with cost management."
"n comparison to New Relic, which I've used before, it's a bit more complicated. It's not as easy to use. It also took some time to get it working. The implementation needs to be simpler."
"It might not have all of the capabilities we will need."
"In terms of pricing, Azure Monitor's billing based on data size can sometimes lead to increased costs, especially when developers need to purge data frequently. While there are mechanisms in place to track and manage this, there is room for improvement in terms of optimizing data pausing and related processes. Enhancements in this area could help mitigate potential billing concerns and provide a more seamless experience for users."
"Azure Monitor could improve by adding capabilities for data observability and integrating more tightly with their data platform components."
"No improvements are needed from my perspective."
"The price could be lower but it is not a must."
"I don't see a clear roadmap in the future for improving this software."
"The solution's automation has room for improvement."
"I am not using OmniPeek for automation, we only do manual testing. Automation testing is tedious to do. The automation should be more user-friendly. I have exposed some APIs but the usage is not user-friendly."
"I would like to see the tool work in an open environment the same as how it does in a closed environment."
"Making it more clear on how to configure the filters, or really automating them, would be an improvement."
"I would like to see the saving feature improved. We have had issues if you do not save your progress then you have to start from the beginning."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Besides standard licensing fees the customer needs to additionally pay based on the ingested data size"
"Azure Monitor is cheaper compared to other third-party monitoring tools."
"Its cost depends on the ingestion of the logs. It could go anywhere. For an out-of-the-box platform such as FrameFlow, you pay pretty much a fixed price and you get what you get, whereas, with something like Azure Monitor, you pay by the ingestion charge, so you can have one client who pays hardly anything for the same alerts, and another client pays loads and loads."
"The tool's pricing is very good. I could say that Microsoft offers different cost models, which are listed on the product's website."
"I would rate Azure Monitor a two out of five for affordability."
"The licensing is a monthly fee."
"Since we are using the basic set, it is more cost-effective compared to other third-party APM solutions."
"Azure Monitor's price is minimal to the point of being almost negligible."
"There are different types of licenses available."
"The pricing for this solution could be improved, as it is a very expensive product."
"We have only purchased the add-on once and have not paid for any subsequent versions as it was too costly for us."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Educational Organization
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Splunk compare with Azure Monitor?
Splunk handles a high amount of data very well. We use Splunk to capture information and as an aggregator for monitoring information from different sources. Splunk is very good at alerting us if we...
What do you like most about Azure Monitor?
Azure Monitor is a very easy-to-use product in the cloud environment.
What needs improvement with Azure Monitor?
Azure Monitor can improve by adding some kind of storage for logs. I can get the runtime logs alone, yet if Azure Monitor can independently add one gigabyte, two gigabytes, or five gigabytes at lea...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Savvius OmniPeek
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rackspace, First Gas, Allscripts, ABB Group
Apcon, Aruba Networks, Avaya Inc., Cisco Systems, Ekahau, Gigamon Systems, HP, IBM, IXIA, Meru Networks, Napatech, NextComputing, Procera Networks, Qualcomm Atheros, Ralink Technology Corporation, Telchemy
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Monitor vs. OmniPeek and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.