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

BigPanda vs IBM Turbonomic comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.0
BigPanda improved efficiency, reduced response times, consolidated alerts, saved man-hours, and increased productivity with seamless integration and intuitive automation.
Sentiment score
7.2
IBM Turbonomic offers quick ROI by reducing hardware costs, optimizing resources, and decreasing operational expenses through automation and efficiency.
BigPanda offers significant time-saving, cost-saving, and resource-saving benefits.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
BigPanda's customer service is generally praised for being helpful and proactive, but some report slow email responses and phone unavailability.
Sentiment score
8.9
IBM Turbonomic's customer service is highly rated for its responsiveness, knowledge, and effectiveness, despite some mixed post-acquisition experiences.
For technical support, we have only had to address password resets and alert mismatching.
They are generally fast with their responses, although there might be some delays when escalating to the next level.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.0
BigPanda scales well with high alert volumes and users, offering seamless integration despite occasional ingestion delays during peaks.
Sentiment score
6.9
IBM Turbonomic is scalable, seamlessly integrating with various environments while its licensing supports expansion, focusing on additional requirements.
It handles large volumes of alerts without limitations.
I rate the scalability of BigPanda at eight.
BigPanda facilitates better collaboration between IT teams by providing a shared view of incidents and requests.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
BigPanda's stability has improved over time, but users recommend manual incident verification due to evolving alert accuracy.
Sentiment score
7.4
IBM Turbonomic is praised for stability and robust performance, with minor update issues swiftly resolved by support.
I would rate the availability of BigPanda at nine because it's almost 99.99% available.
BigPanda is now stable.
 

Room For Improvement

BigPanda needs analytics, usability, and integration improvements, along with dashboard upgrades and reduced false alerts and ingestion delays.
IBM Turbonomic needs an improved interface, better reporting, clearer documentation, more integrations, and a stable, mobile-compatible platform.
A 'deep dive' analysis feature would be appreciated to give detailed insights such as CPU usage and disk space analysis.
The planned maintenance feature in BigPanda needs enhancements due to its limited scheduling options.
I am not sure if we can pull reports of bulk incidents in different formats like PDF, Excel, or CSV.
 

Setup Cost

BigPanda offers flexible, mid-range pricing suited for high-growth enterprises, with opinions on cost-effectiveness varying among users.
IBM Turbonomic offers flexible, competitive pricing models, providing value through resource optimization and reducing hardware expenses effectively.
 

Valuable Features

Alert management excels with integration, user-friendly interface, AI-driven efficiency, and simplified monitoring for improved incident management.
IBM Turbonomic enhances efficiency through automation, capacity management, reporting, and planning, optimizing resource allocation and infrastructure decisions.
Its automation has significantly improved incident response times, reducing the process to within one minute.
It can correlate multiple issues within a single device, create a single incident, and thus reduce noise and provide faster resolution.
BigPanda improves service reliability with instant resolution, increased uptime, and reduced mean time to resolution, thus enhancing service quality.
 

Categories and Ranking

BigPanda
Ranking in AIOps
18th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
IT Infrastructure Monitoring (51st), IT Alerting and Incident Management (12th)
IBM Turbonomic
Ranking in AIOps
5th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
205
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (5th), Cloud Management (4th), Virtualization Management Tools (4th), IT Financial Management (1st), IT Operations Analytics (4th), Cloud Analytics (1st), Cloud Cost Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the AIOps category, the mindshare of BigPanda is 3.1%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
AIOps
 

Featured Reviews

Ankit-Mathur - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers comprehensive alert monitoring and a user-friendly interface but requires manual validation to provide accurate alerts
For new users, I would advise using BigPanda for its comprehensive alert monitoring and integration with ServiceNow. Its mapping capabilities and user-friendly interface make it valuable for incident analysis and prioritization. As users become more familiar with the tool, its full potential will become apparent, enhancing efficiency and effectiveness over time. It is easy for someone to learn to use BigPanda for the first time. We start with basic examples that everyone can understand, then provide verbal introductions followed by hands-on training over two weeks. We encourage making mistakes and asking questions to ensure understanding. It depends on the trainer's approach, but with proper guidance, anyone can learn effectively. Overall, I would rate BigPanda as a five out of ten. For it to be a perfect ten, it would need to consistently provide accurate alerts without requiring manual validation. This means it should effectively suppress similar incidents, eliminating the need for constant monitoring. Once it reaches this level of reliability, BigPanda would be exceptional.
Keldric Emery - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which AIOps solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Any advice about APM solutions?
There are many factors and we know little about your requirements (size of org, technology stack, management systems, the scope of implementation). Our goal was to consolidate APM and infra monitor...
What do you like most about BigPanda?
One of the most valuable features of BigPanda is its user-friendly interface.
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 set as a percentage of the consumption of some of our customers' services. The ...
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. This helps us get a consolidated view of all customer spending into a single d...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nagios, ServiceNow, ITSM, NOC, CMDB Evolved, RemedyIncident Management Process
IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
Find out what your peers are saying about BigPanda vs. IBM Turbonomic and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.