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

Cisco Intersight vs ScienceLogic comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

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
7.8
Cisco Intersight delivers ROI through reduced workload and costs, fewer personnel needs, and efficiency gains in network management.
Sentiment score
7.4
ScienceLogic users report high returns, reduced incident response times, improved troubleshooting, and benefits outweigh initial costs by year two.
The return on investment is fair but often challenged by medium-sized businesses who may question its adequacy.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
Cisco Intersight's support is praised for professionalism and availability, though access to the right engineer can vary.
Sentiment score
7.7
ScienceLogic's customer service is praised for responsiveness, knowledge, efficiency, and round-the-clock support despite occasional delays.
For complex issues, it's challenging to get the right engineer quickly unless you have a specific contract like CX.
Cisco provides better support than anyone else.
Problems with Skylar may require longer wait times due to limited resource expertise.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Cisco Intersight is scalable, easy to adjust, requires minimal maintenance, and supports growth, fitting diverse organizational needs.
Sentiment score
6.9
ScienceLogic offers scalability across devices, but could improve ease in scaling operations for cloud and on-premise environments.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
Cisco Intersight is generally stable with some version-specific reliability issues; upgrades and documentation gaps pose occasional challenges.
Sentiment score
7.1
ScienceLogic is highly regarded for stability, reliability, and efficiency, with minor issues not affecting overall performance and quick recovery.
Some steps are not included in the official documentation, which can create challenges.
Stability should relate to whether the platform fails, stops working, or breaks.
 

Room For Improvement

Cisco Intersight needs improved stability, automation, and compatibility to compete with VMware Tanzu in hybrid cloud management.
ScienceLogic users seek improvements in reporting, UI, API, integration, observability, performance monitoring, documentation, and proactive notifications.
There is a significant issue regarding migration from UCS Manager into Intersight without formatting the Fabric Interconnects (FI), which is problematic in a production environment.
More products should be made compatible with iWORK, including more software and hardware.
While some other companies have easier APIs, using this solution demands significant expertise.
Integrating observability and APM monitoring into the overall portfolio would be beneficial.
 

Setup Cost

Cisco Intersight's pricing is competitive, straightforward, and generally rated positively, with free basic monitoring and paid advanced features.
ScienceLogic offers negotiable but potentially costly pricing with scalable, tier-based licenses, requiring careful cost management.
The pricing mechanism sounds fair.
It could be cheaper.
 

Valuable Features

Cisco Intersight excels in integration, scalability, and management, offering automation and analytics for efficient infrastructure optimization.
ScienceLogic offers customizable dashboards, integration capabilities, AI mapping, and robust monitoring for effective IT and network management.
This solution has provided time savings and required fewer people to operate this tool, rather than direct cost savings.
It provides visibility into other products and storage, and is beneficial for environments where Cisco and other vendors coexist, allowing full visibility of the entire infrastructure.
It offers visibility and optimization of workloads, which are very important features for a company.
It offers over 500 integrations with a wide range of device types, referred to as PowerPacks, which are prebuilt integrations for hundreds, if not thousands, of integration types.
The CMDB update and the automatic CMDB update are valuable.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Intersight
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Management (12th)
ScienceLogic
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
24th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (7th), Unified Communications Monitoring (1st), Network Monitoring Software (27th), Server Monitoring (12th), IT Operations Analytics (7th), Cloud Monitoring Software (19th), AIOps (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Cisco Intersight is 2.1%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScienceLogic is 1.9%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

ItzikLiberman - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides data center management and full infrastructure visibility
Cisco Intersight is a very effective tool for data center infrastructure management. It provides visibility into other products and storage, and is beneficial for environments where Cisco and other vendors coexist, allowing full visibility of the entire infrastructure. We have visibility to other products and storages, some networking. It is also valuable for its integration capabilities with other products.
Michael Wenn - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers comprehensive monitoring and tool consolidation but integration complexity needs improvement
There is room for improvement in the speed of setting up the service and integrating PowerPacks. Although these prebuilt features are great, there is considerable complexity in bringing them together to create a unified dashboard. Even with many good integrations and deep visibility, the implementation takes time, especially when it doesn't involve these integrations. While some other companies have easier APIs, using this solution demands significant expertise. It's challenging for new customers to implement independently. The implementation speed of non-PowerPack or non-out-of-the-box integrations should be improved. Additionally, the AI automation feature is not yet very rich due to resource constraints supporting a wide platform.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
38%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
5%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Intersight?
Intersight can validate our environment.
What is your primary use case for Cisco Intersight?
I use it mostly for managing servers and updating their hardware licenses to get the hardware status in the cloud. Mostly, my customers develop Intersight on-premises because there are many restric...
What do you like most about ScienceLogic?
The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support.
What needs improvement with ScienceLogic?
Integrating observability and APM monitoring into the overall portfolio would be beneficial.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Intersight
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EXMAR, RapidScale
Kellogg Company, Booz Allen, Cisco, Red Bull, Fidelus, Telstra, Comcast, CSC, Peak 10, HughesNet, Hosting, Datapipe, US Army, Equinix, Rite Aid, Carbonite, Sybase, Carpathia, AT&T, ePlus, Dimension Data, Virtustream, Boeing, Honeywell
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Intersight vs. ScienceLogic and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.