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

Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline vs Ixia Network Packet Brokers 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Gigamon Deep Observability ...
Ranking in Network Packet Broker (NPB)
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (23rd), Event Monitoring (10th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (18th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (27th), Web Application Firewall (WAF) (20th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (22nd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (11th)
Ixia Network Packet Brokers
Ranking in Network Packet Broker (NPB)
3rd
Average Rating
10.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Traffic Switching (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Network Packet Broker (NPB) category, the mindshare of Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline is 33.6%, up from 30.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ixia Network Packet Brokers is 20.1%, up from 20.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Packet Broker (NPB)
 

Featured Reviews

LeonardoAlves - PeerSpot reviewer
Improved the capability to analyze the environment and network problems with easy setup
It improved the capability to analyze the environment and network problems. It also helped streamline your security and performance monitoring The application I use is a script. My environment is a mix of technologies. I have many passionate people in my network who are on a journey in…
Ahmet Kilic - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient, reliable, and easy to set up
We're a customer and end-user. I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. We needed to buy Package Broker. It was a requirement for us. If you want to use a security chain on your internet, you have to use something like Package Broker. We decided on a benchmark and then had a look around, and then we decided to get Ixia Packet Broker in the end. I'd recommend the solution to others. Overall, I would rate the solution ten out of ten as we have been very satisfied with the capabilities on offer.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature for improving network visibility with Gigamon is the packet filtering capability."
"It offers straightforward integration."
"The solution is straightforward to set up."
"It has high stability."
"The most valuable feature is NetFlow."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the encryption feature. From a security perspective, the solution hasn't significantly strengthened our security posture. However, it has greatly improved performance by streamlining encryption processes and avoiding encryption at multiple layers. This has also simplified troubleshooting, as we can whitelist certain processes."
"It is a good product. It provides network visibility, which is important. Gigamon can bring some optimizations to my network. It is helpful for security inspection, and it makes my firewall work fast because my firewall doesn't have to do the inspection of the SSL connections, for example."
"The solution can scale quite well."
 

Cons

"The graphical user interface could be improved."
"The security should be improved."
"In terms of improvement, while the initial setup is not overly complicated, we did encounter a few issues."
"The Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline should have a feature showing the traffic flow within its platform. Currently, customers have to use separate tools for monitoring, which is inconvenient. If it had its visibility feature, it would make monitoring easier and more complete without needing extra tools."
"They should increase the solution's cluster capacity."
"Its filtering feature needs improvement."
"It only inspects a specific kind of traffic. There should be different kinds of use cases."
"We find the product to be expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is highly-priced."
"I would rate the solution as expensive, around an eight or nine out of ten. There are other competitive solutions available."
"The solution's price is reasonable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Packet Broker (NPB) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
10%
Healthcare Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline?
The most valuable feature for improving network visibility with Gigamon is the packet filtering capability.
What needs improvement with Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline?
The challenge is monitoring the cloud network. In on-premises environments, monitoring is straightforward, as I can verify all packets and communications. However, due to the way access tools and p...
What is your primary use case for Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline?
It improved the capability to analyze the environment and network problems. It also helped streamline your security and performance monitoring.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Gigamon, GigaSecure
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Amica Insurance, College of William & Mary, Gamma, IntercontinentalExchange, OppenheimerFunds
Texas Farm Bureau Insurance
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Nexus Dashboard Data Broker vs. Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.