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

Grafana vs OmniPeek comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 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

Grafana
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OmniPeek
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
67th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (74th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of Grafana is 6.4%, up from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OmniPeek is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Vikash-Agarwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Displays data visually from multiple sources while integrating seamlessly with existing systems
Grafana provides a user-friendly interface for viewing infrastructure metrics through dashboards. It integrates with Prometheus to pull data and offers a straightforward setup process. Users can monitor metrics with greater ease, and the tool aids in quickly identifying issues by providing a visual representation of data. Grafana's integration capability is straightforward, which facilitates building dashboards as needed.
Kunwar Preet Singh Sodhi - PeerSpot reviewer
User-friendly, stable, and scalable
The solution's automation has room for improvement. I have observed that Wireshark is much more commonly used for automation than OmniPeek. This is because when scripts are involved, Wireshark provides a great deal of flexibility for automating the process of packet sniffing. In the case of OmniPeek, its capabilities are limited, which restricts its automation potential. However, it is already user-friendly and compatible with Microsoft, so if it were to become comparable to Wireshark, it could potentially dominate the market. I have seen many new versions of OmniPeek, but I have never seen an automation version. The price of OmniPeek can be improved. Many customers have chosen the solution due to its user-friendly nature, but the cost often prevents them from making a purchase. This means that they may opt for an open-source tool instead. We should look into making the pricing more competitive and consider offering customization options to increase its utility in automation. This could be a game-changer.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution provides valuable insights into the health of our infrastructure in real time."
"It has good stability."
"The most valuable aspect is customization. There are many customizations possible, so I like that."
"The dashboards are the most valuable features."
"Grafana is able to connect with multiple data sources, unlike Elasticsearch."
"Grafana's built-in integration with third-party tools, databases, and MQs is an amazing feature."
"It is a stable, reliable product."
"The integration between Loki and Tempo is valuable."
"It's a solid piece of software. It's stable."
"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek was the ability it gave us to see the connection procedure."
"The most valuable feature is OmniPeek is user-friendly."
"The most valuable features are the voice bot, which checks the quality of service for voice, and the expert view that gives me insight on what and where to troubleshoot."
"I believe the most crucial feature of OmniPeek search is the ability to sniff packets based on channel switching."
"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek is the ability to assign custom color codes to the different packets easily."
 

Cons

"The look and feel of the charting and graph capabilities in Grafana could improve. If they provided a storyboard type of feature as they have in other solutions, such as PowerBI. The multi-tenanted and stitch metrics features could improve."
"There is room for improvement when using multiple dashboards because they can become complicated to keep track of and use."
"The features are complicated and not intuitive."
"Its UI features to create charts can also be improved. Some features could have a link to the documentation."
"Grafana could consider building its own metrics system to eliminate the reliance on other tools like Prometheus, providing a one-stop solution."
"The solution should include online support."
"If there was an issue on one node, we couldn't drill down and see all the issues on other nodes."
"The product's configuration for saving files could be improved."
"I would like to see the saving feature improved. We have had issues if you do not save your progress then you have to start from the beginning."
"I don't see a clear roadmap in the future for improving this software."
"The solution's automation has room for improvement."
"I am not using OmniPeek for automation, we only do manual testing. Automation testing is tedious to do. The automation should be more user-friendly. I have exposed some APIs but the usage is not user-friendly."
"Making it more clear on how to configure the filters, or really automating them, would be an improvement."
"I would like to see the tool work in an open environment the same as how it does in a closed environment."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using the open-source license."
"My company uses the open-source version of Grafana, so it's free."
"We use the open-source version of Grafana."
"I give the price an eight out of ten."
"​Grafana is free and open source.​"
"You need to purchase the solution's license for its commercial use."
"It's free of cost; it operates as an open-source tool."
"Since Grafana is an open-source solution, it is free of cost."
"The pricing for this solution could be improved, as it is a very expensive product."
"There are different types of licenses available."
"We have only purchased the add-on once and have not paid for any subsequent versions as it was too costly for us."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Educational Organization
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Grafana?
The product's initial setup phase was very easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Grafana?
I used the open-source version for my learning, which was free. In an enterprise setting, pricing is reasonable, as many customers use it.
What needs improvement with Grafana?
The interface is not well-liked by my customers. Grafana cannot be easily embedded into certain applications and offers limited customization options for graphs. I think predictive capabilities in ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Savvius OmniPeek
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, Adobe, Optum, Sky, Nvidia, Roblox, Wells Fargo, BlackRock, Informatica, Maersk, Daimler Truck, SNCF, Atlassian, DHL, SAP, JPMorgan Chase, Cisco, Citi and many others.
Apcon, Aruba Networks, Avaya Inc., Cisco Systems, Ekahau, Gigamon Systems, HP, IBM, IXIA, Meru Networks, Napatech, NextComputing, Procera Networks, Qualcomm Atheros, Ralink Technology Corporation, Telchemy
Find out what your peers are saying about Grafana vs. OmniPeek and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.