We performed a comparison between Centreon and SCOM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"Another feature we use is Business Activity, which provides us with an end-user perspective when a service is down or isn't working correctly. This is helpful when monitoring the KPIs. When we see a device or server that isn't working, we find the root cause."
"We have a single GUI where we can view the status of all our infrastructure."
"Centreon's most valuable feature is Opsgenie."
"What we like about it is that, whereas with Nagios, by design, if you have five or six data centers, you have to open five or six web pages to see what's going on, In Centreon, this is all included in one page, a single site, one dashboard. You don't have to jump from one specific dashboard to the other."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to build an abstraction of service visualization. You can add services to an entity called Business Activities and you can see the state of these activities."
"We have the business activity monitoring, the map, and the MBI modules and they are all very good."
"We have all our tickets inside Centreon in real-time and can monitor a lot of ELP and CLN in real-time for application purposes."
"We are alerted on service impacts and not when something is down. We have saved a lot of time on non-business-hours intervention."
"Availability monitoring is the feature I have found most valuable, as well as the capacity and ability to send notifications."
"I enjoy its integration with the Microsoft Active Directory functions, which means users, computers, or other group policies can connect with Windows Active Directory."
"This solution satisfies all of the requirements that we need for our Windows-based systems, so if you are using the Windows platform then this is an easy solution."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"The product’s auto-remediation feature helps with automation."
"The ease of deployment, especially on Windows platforms, is valuable."
"The stability has been great."
"It takes a lot of the headache out of managing your data centers and software in other places."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"To get it started is a lot of work, since it comes empty. We had to push information into it to make it work."
"The most important issue is the capability to interconnect with other systems. It already exists for some of them. For example, the Stream Connector is something we use to populate data in another system. This kind of facility for connecting should exist for all products that it makes sense to have connected to a monitoring solution."
"I went through a few things with them to do with Centreon MAP, to do with active polygons, being able to draw an area and make that active. The functionality was in the older version of Centreon MAP and in the new version, which was a complete rewrite, they dropped it."
"Improvements I would like to see include a discovery solution, better reports, and end-to-end monitoring."
"Centreon needs to improve the granularity of the data as well as the graphical data. It would also be better to if there was improvement to the filtering/grouping system as well as the creation of views."
"Sometimes, when the GUI and some of the search fields are being reset, and I return to the page, then I have to set them again. Therefore, some improvement on the UI and the filtering is needed."
"I think Centreon's security could be improved by leveraging AI. That's where things are heading in the industry."
"Centreon introduced network discovery in the most recent update. However, it doesn't work well. Our previous monitoring tool could discover networking equipment on the network and identify the relationships between the devices."
"The GI is difficult to work with and the reporting servers are also difficult."
"Third-party tools have had to be created to make SCOM management pack creation more efficient and effective. However, this weighs down the application as it just adds a resource requirement, which is ballooning the size of the necessary storage and all that for essentially substandard components."
"System Center just provided upgrade and update features for Windows clients, and Windows systems, and did not support Linux, Android, or iOS, and other operating systems. They need to provide better integration with other operating systems if they don't already."
"It lacks certain details that other products do better, like granular access and better application monitoring."
"In a future release, they should add email notification alerts."
"It would be a much better product if Microsoft provided management packs with the product."
"In terms of features that could be improved, I would say the agent integration into the operating system. We are having difficulties integrating Linux into some of the networking devices."
"I would like to better be able to monitor Oracle processes."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Centreon is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 27 reviews while SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 78 reviews. Centreon is rated 8.6, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Centreon writes "Proactive reporting guides our NOC on what needs to be fixed, saving them time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". Centreon is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios Core, Icinga and Elastic Observability, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and ManageEngine OpManager. See our Centreon vs. SCOM report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.