We performed a comparison between IBM Rational System Architect and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Architecture Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The user interface is good. It's both clear and comprehensible. It's easy to work with."
"There are a lot of features I find valuable, but I think that the metamodel customization is one of the best features that the solution offers."
"We have seen ROI with this solution over the years that we have used it."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"The system provides powerful tools for obtaining reports and documentation."
"This is a useful tool for IT people who need to design their solution architecture."
"There are a lot of features in Enterprise Architect. It allows us to take on a lot of tasks."
"A feature I like most about Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is its ease of use."
"The profiles and ready-made templates are an extremely helpful feature. This is one of the biggest features that I find very useful in Sparx."
"It is simple to build the first model for the solution."
"The most valuable feature of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is the value streams."
"Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect supports multiple modeling languages like ArchiMate for database design, software lifecycle visualization, and team management."
"The reverse engineering of the database is already there, but in the next release I would like to see some pilot supplied with the solution in order to address any database."
"This solution can be more user-friendly and easier to use, with better dashboards."
"The solution needs to better integrate with other products, like Microsoft."
"There needs to be more information at the outset about how to use the solution and how to deploy it. The deployment process needs improvement."
"When the model is large, it is a bit slow to render."
"It should be made Windows compatible."
"It can be improved in the area of shared documentation. The idea is that the architecture tool can call back to an enterprise asset, pull that information, and link that as a sub-artifact."
"The Business Process Modeling or BPM feature can be improved to make it more interactive and user friendly because it is a tool for technical people. My current use is only for business process modeling notation and putting in the icons etc. You need to take them in as a class, which makes things very complex. Because of this complexity, it is not an easy-to-handle solution. Enterprise Architect is not very good for mockups. We cannot create user screens and other similar kinds of stuff, which is bad. For these things, we prefer to use Axure RP and other similar solutions. They should either remove this feature from this product or provide some kind of connectivity with Axure RP so that people can do better mockups of screens and import them. They need to augment and strengthen the BPM feature, which is the main feature. They need to put in some elements like artificial intelligence and augmented reality. They should look into such features because these things are coming up."
"The automatic creation of reports based on the model elements could be improved."
"I think the product is good. When I'm trying to do something specific for some part of project documentation, it's hard to get it figured out if you don't use it all the time. It's such a massive tool, it's hard to figure out how to dig in and get to the documentation where you have to be to get some idea of what to do. There are not a lot of examples that I'm aware of to be able to do that."
"I think that collaboration can be better."
"From a practical point of view, we need speed and reliability for creating a model and doing some really meaningful tasks such as application landscape, refactoring, etc. These are two primary criteria. Sometimes, when you import something, it creates the object duplicates, or it allows you to do something that you're not supposed to do. For example, validation is missing. This could be frustrating because when you work at a high speed, you need to come back and start fixing things that the tool allowed you to go with, which is not quite good. So, there should probably be some internal mechanisms to advise you about what you're doing and what is probably not the best idea."
More Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational System Architect is ranked 20th in Enterprise Architecture Management while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Architecture Management with 97 reviews. IBM Rational System Architect is rated 7.4, while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Rational System Architect writes "Modeling is useful, but many features need improvement and technical support is lacking". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect writes "Easy to set up and had no issues with stability, but it's not a very friendly tool, and its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement". IBM Rational System Architect is most compared with , whereas Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is most compared with Visual Paradigm, Visio, No Magic MagicDraw, Lucidchart and SAP PowerDesigner. See our IBM Rational System Architect vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management 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.
