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

Dell CloudIQ vs OP5 Monitor 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Dell CloudIQ
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
30th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OP5 Monitor
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
38th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (38th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Dell CloudIQ is 1.0%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OP5 Monitor is 0.8%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

ClaudioSalgado - PeerSpot reviewer
Has proactive monitoring with predictive insights and a user-friendly interface
Some of the most valuable features of CloudIQ include its health status alerts, which allow you to see quickly if there is something that needs immediate attention, preventing the need to check each system individually. It provides a status with traffic light colors, where red indicates danger, yellow means attention is needed, and green represents normal conditions to easily understand the health of the environment. The quick overview aids in decision-making. Additionally, CloudIQ's predictive capabilities, which are enhanced by artificial intelligence, have improved operational efficiency by providing proactive information to prevent issues before they arise.
Harish Venkateshappa - PeerSpot reviewer
Useful online resources, customizable, and highly effective monitoring
The solution is useful for tweaking. However, there have been some negative experiences, such as limited report capabilities. The only report available is in PDF format, making it difficult for teams managing multiple servers to extract data in Excel format. The speaker recommends that the team improve the report capabilities to better serve users. If there are corrupt files the data can be extracted from them. Anyone who wants to see the performance of memory usage, such as whether it's at 80 to 90 percent, can use this tool. However, other tools can provide this information in two minutes, this tool is more time-consuming and the report it provides is not very effective for practical use. When it comes to reports, the tool falls short. During a recent call, it was noted that while the company has distributed servers across the globe, only the master server can accommodate the reports and events, causing delays. If other servers experience issues, the team cannot view the reporting or tag things, such as for troubleshooting purposes. If this aspect was improved it would be an excellent tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The dashboard is clear and user-friendly."
"Some of the most valuable features of CloudIQ include its health status alerts, which allow you to see quickly if there is something that needs immediate attention, preventing the need to check each system individually."
"Has really nice roll-up dashboards."
"The dashboard is clear and user-friendly."
"CloudIQ allows us to monitor our servers centrally, and we can receive notifications in case of issues, like a potential hard drive failure."
"The best thing about this solution is that you can check for the infrastructure and system updates that you might need to be compliant with the Cloud."
"Fewer vulnerabilities have been observed in the four years we have used the solution."
"Mobile application is the most valuable feature for us. We can monitor all the storages on our phones. It's really good."
"With limited hardware or a virtual machine, you can address a huge network, hundreds of thousands of elements that need to be monitored. Other commercial software is not on that level."
"The best feature is that it is very relatable, stable, and scalable. The logger is a part of the software, but it's not the most important point of it."
"OP5 Monitor is a great choice due to its being built on an open-source monitoring tool and provides ample opportunity for customization based on specific support requirements. It is also user-friendly and easy to manage with a wide range of plugins available for use. In comparison to other enterprise tools, such as Micro Focus, OP5 Monitor stands out for its features and cost-effectiveness, making it the best tool in the market. Customization is one of the key strengths of the tool and provides a lot of capabilities. Additionally, it is easy to find support and plugins for the tool through online resources."
"We can also observe whatever we want, and there are no limitations."
"The API makes it pretty easy to integrate with any system."
"It monitors and continuously tests everything that is of importance to you and your users. It could be everything from monitoring disk space to CPU usage to memory. It could include determining if the response time in your e-commerce platform is quick enough, or whether you have too many bounces from some of the pages on your website. You want to monitor anything that could cost you money or time or resources. You can do that with this system. It's very flexible."
 

Cons

"PowerScale is the only file system offered and that is limiting."
"There is a need for improvement in predictive maintenance, which I assume is somewhat AI-driven."
"In terms of improvement, they should enhance the product range."
"It can improve the reporting facility to create custom reports or dashboards."
"Doesn't do well in terms of integrating with technologies other than Dell."
"Getting through support has become a difficult thing. Dell's support has degraded since they took over EMC. It's a bit difficult to use."
"Supporting legacy systems is an area that can be improved."
"If you have a heterogeneous environment, there might be some limitations in coverage since CloudIQ is primarily designed for Dell-based infrastructures."
"They need to improve the dashboard interface."
"OP5 lacks some visualization, a feature that makes some other products nice. Op5 is built for purpose, which is fine, but if you compare it with some new products, the visualization is not so appealing, especially for management... If you don't need fancy visualizations, OP5 is fine."
"IT environments today are in constant flux. This is driven by the newer cloud technologies such as Kubernetes and Docker, etc. The whole Nagios-based monitoring system that OP5 is created on top of, is based on a host-service model. There is a need for a strategy on what to do with more dynamic environments. There is some cool stuff going on in that direction."
"The user interface is not what we are used to these days, and should be improved."
"The solution is useful for tweaking. However, there have been some negative experiences, such as limited report capabilities. The only report available is in PDF format, making it difficult for teams managing multiple servers to extract data in Excel format. The speaker recommends that the team improve the report capabilities to better serve users."
"We do not get performance reports properly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I believe it is a free product because we don't pay for it."
"The solution is more expensive than NetApp which offers file systems in various price ranges."
"The cost of the license and support are separate. If you want platinum call support, it will cost more than a regular call. I did not opt for it, as it is an additional cost."
"OP5 has a very low price as a solution, compared to many other solutions out there."
"It was not expensive. And because it's less demanding in terms of hardware, you don't have to pay for another SQL or other database license, and you can have a huge installation on one machine..."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
847,625 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
Government
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Dell CloudIQ?
It can improve the reporting facility to create custom reports or dashboards.
What is your primary use case for Dell CloudIQ?
I use it for monitoring environment security today. I look at security, capacity, and availability in our environment.
What advice do you have for others considering Dell CloudIQ?
I would rate the overall product an eight out of ten.
What do you like most about OP5 Monitor?
With limited hardware or a virtual machine, you can address a huge network, hundreds of thousands of elements that need to be monitored. Other commercial software is not on that level.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OP5 Monitor?
Licensing is done yearly, or you can pay for a longer period. It was not expensive. And because it's less demanding in terms of hardware, you don't have to pay for another SQL or other database lic...
What needs improvement with OP5 Monitor?
It's always good when it's open to more platforms, with even more integration, especially ticketing solutions like ServiceNow. I have built integrations with some other tools, so this is a point fo...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

North Carolina State University
Svenska Spel, Carus, VGL, Tele2, Viking Line, Clas Ohlson, Vanderlande, Försäkringskassan
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell CloudIQ vs. OP5 Monitor and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,625 professionals have used our research since 2012.