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

IBM Turbonomic vs OpenText Operations Bridge comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 1, 2025

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
7.2
IBM Turbonomic offers quick ROI by reducing hardware costs, optimizing resources, and decreasing operational expenses through automation and efficiency.
Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText Operations Bridge offers up to 90% ROI with quick integration, although precise ROI varies among users.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
8.9
IBM Turbonomic's customer service is highly rated for its responsiveness, knowledge, and effectiveness, despite some mixed post-acquisition experiences.
Sentiment score
5.1
OpenText Operations Bridge's customer service is praised, but technical support varies, with higher tiers receiving positive feedback.
OpenText goes out to bring the right people to answer any inquiries I have.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.9
IBM Turbonomic is scalable, seamlessly integrating with various environments while its licensing supports expansion, focusing on additional requirements.
Sentiment score
7.4
OpenText Operations Bridge is scalable, adaptable, manages large deployments well, but may require configuration with minor UI speed issues.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
IBM Turbonomic is praised for stability and robust performance, with minor update issues swiftly resolved by support.
Sentiment score
6.9
OpenText Operations Bridge is stable with resolved issues, but complex setups and integration challenges remain, improving with support.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM Turbonomic needs an improved interface, better reporting, clearer documentation, more integrations, and a stable, mobile-compatible platform.
OpenText Operations Bridge needs scalability, stability, usability, and cost improvements, along with better integration and reduced resource demands.
Splunk is more business-friendly due to its prettier interface.
 

Setup Cost

IBM Turbonomic offers flexible, competitive pricing models, providing value through resource optimization and reducing hardware expenses effectively.
OpenText Operations Bridge offers flexible pricing for enterprises but may be costly and complex for smaller companies.
From a cost perspective, OpenText Operations Bridge is cost-effective as it saves us man hours.
 

Valuable Features

IBM Turbonomic enhances efficiency through automation, capacity management, reporting, and planning, optimizing resource allocation and infrastructure decisions.
OpenText Operations Bridge centralizes data, enhancing visibility and efficiency through integration, automation, and flexible, scalable monitoring capabilities.
This integration ensures that when monitoring systems alert and subsequently resolve, tickets are automatically created and closed.
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM Turbonomic
Ranking in IT Operations Analytics
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
205
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (5th), Cloud Management (4th), Virtualization Management Tools (4th), IT Financial Management (1st), Cloud Analytics (1st), Cloud Cost Management (1st), AIOps (5th)
OpenText Operations Bridge
Ranking in IT Operations Analytics
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (8th), Cloud Monitoring Software (30th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the IT Operations Analytics category, the mindshare of IBM Turbonomic is 0.3%. The mindshare of OpenText Operations Bridge is 1.9%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Operations Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Keldric Emery - PeerSpot reviewer
Saves time and costs while reducing performance degradation
It's been a very good solution. The reporting has been very, very valuable as, with a very large environment, it's very hard to get your hands on the environment. Turbonomic does that work for you and really shows you where some of the cost savings can be done. It also helps you with the reporting side. Me being able to see that this machine hasn't been used for a very long time, or seeing that a machine is overused and that it might need more RAM or CPU, et cetera, helps me understand my infrastructure. The cost savings are drastic in the cloud feature in Azure and in AWS. In some of those other areas, I'm able to see what we're using, what we're not using, and how we can change to better fit what we have. It gives us the ability for applications and teams to see the hardware and how it's being used versus how they've been told it's being used. The reporting really helps with that. It shows which application is really using how many resources or the least amount of resources. Some of the gaps between an infrastructure person like myself and an application are filled. It allows us to come to terms by seeing the raw data. This aspect is very important. In the past, it was me saying "I don't think that this application is using that many resources" or "I think this needs more resources." I now have concrete evidence as well as reporting and some different analytics that I can show. It gives me the evidence that I would need to show my application owners proof of what I'm talking about. In terms of the downtime, meantime, and resolution that Turbonomic has been able to show in reports, it has given me an idea of things before things happen. That is important as I would really like to see a machine that needs resources, and get resources to it before we have a problem where we have contention and aspects of that nature. It's been helpful in that regard. Turbonomic has helped us understand where performance risks exist. Turbonomic looks at my environment and at the servers and even at the different hosts and how they're handling traffic and the number of machines that are on them. I can analyze it and it can show me which server or which host needs resources, CPU, or RAM. Even in Azure, in the cloud, I'm able to see which resources are not being used to full capacity and understand where I could scale down some in order to save cost. It is very, very helpful in assessing performance risk by navigating underlying causes and actions. The reason why it's helpful is because if there's a machine that's overrunning the CPU, I can run reports every week to get an idea of machines that would need CPU, RAM, or additional resources. Those resources could be added by Turbonomic - not so much by me - on a scheduled basis. I personally don't have to do it. It actually gives me a little bit of my life back. It helps me to get resources added without me physically having to touch each and every resource myself. Turbonomic has helped to reduce performance degradation in the same way as it's able to see the resources and see what it needs and add them before a problem occurs. It follows the trends. It sees the trends of what's happening and it's able to add or take away those resources. For example, we discuss when we need to do certain disaster recovery tests. Over the years, Turbo will be able to see, for example, around this time of year that certain people ramp up certain resources in an environment, and then it will add the resources as required. Another time of year, it will realize these resources are not being used as much, and it takes those resources away. In this way, it saves money and time while letting us know where we are. We've saved a great deal of time using this product when I consider how I'd have to multiply myself and people like me who would have to add resources to devices or take resources away. We've saved hundreds of hours. Most of the time those hours would have to be after hours as well, which are more valuable to me as that's my personal time. Those saved hours are across months, not years. I would consider the number of resources that Turbonomic is adding and taking away and the placement (if I had to do it all myself) would end up being hundreds of hours monthly that would be added without the help of Turbonomic. It helps us to meet SLAs mainly due to the fact that we're able to keep the servers going and to keep the servers in an environment, to keep them to where (if we need to add resources) we can add them at any given time. It will keep our SLAs where they need to be. If we were to have downtime due to the fact that we had to add resources or take resources away and it was an emergency, then that would prevent us from meeting our SLAs. We also use it to monitor Azure and to monitor our machines in terms of the resources that are out there and the cost involved. In a lot of cases, it does a better job of giving us cost information than Azure itself does. We're able to see the cost per machine. We're able to see the unattached volume and storage that we are paying for. It gives us a great level of insight. Turbonomic gives us the time to be able to focus on innovation and ongoing modernization. Some of the tasks that it does are tasks that I would not necessarily have to do. It's very helpful in that I know that the resources are there where they need to be and it gives me an idea of what changes need to be made or what suggestions it's making. Even if I don't take them, I'm able to get a good idea of some best practices through Turbonomic. One of the ways that Turbonomic does to help bring new resources to market is that we are now able to see the resources (or at least monitor the resources) before they get out to the general public within our environment. We saw immediate value from the product in the test environment. We set it up in a small test environment and we started with just placement and we could tell that the placement was being handled more efficiently than what VMware was doing. There was value for us in placement alone. Then, after we left the placement, we began to look at the resources and there were resources. We immediately began to see a change in the environment. It has made the application and performance better, mainly due to the fact that we are able to give resources and take resources away based on what the need is. Our expenses, definitely, have been in a better place based on the savings that we've been able to make in the cloud and on-prem. Turbonomic has been very helpful in that regard. We've been able to see the savings easily based on the reports in Turbonomic. That, and just seeing the machines that are not being used to capacity allows us to set everything up so it runs a bit more efficiently.
Ahmed Salman - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful data integration, comprehensive automation, and hybrid compatibility
The data lake is a very powerful feature within OpenText Operations Bridge. It can integrate with any BI tool to collect AI data and perform a variety of functions. It offers hybrid compatibility and supports desktop application customization and cloud integration. Another essential capability is server automation, which became significantly easier with the software appliance for deployment. This solution also provides role-based access that enhances data privacy and security.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Operations Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Turbonomic?
It offers different scenarios. It provides more capabilities than many other tools available. Typically, its price is set as a percentage of the consumption of some of our customers' services. The ...
What needs improvement with Turbonomic?
The implementation could be enhanced.
What is your primary use case for Turbonomic?
We use IBM Turbonomic to automate our cloud operations, including monitoring, consolidating dashboards, and reporting. This helps us get a consolidated view of all customer spending into a single d...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Operations Bridge?
From a cost perspective, OpenText Operations Bridge is cost-effective as it saves us man hours. What used to be done manually by a person is now done automatically. With its automation capabilities...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Operations Bridge?
The only aspect I find lacking in OpenText Operations Bridge is more aesthetic. The dashboards from OpenText Operations Bridge, when compared to those from Splunk, are less visually appealing. Splu...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Operations Bridge?
We use OpenText Operations Bridge ( /products/opentext-operations-bridge-reviews ) more from an event correlation perspective. We do not use it for pure monitoring since we have other monitoring to...
 

Also Known As

Turbonomic, VMTurbo Operations Manager
Micro Focus Operations Bridge, Operations Bridge Manager, Micro Focus Operations Analytics
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, J.B. Hunt, BBC, The Capita Group, SulAmérica, Rabobank, PROS, ThinkON, O.C. Tanner Co.
GE Money Bank, Bank AlJazira, Tech Mahindra
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Turbonomic vs. OpenText Operations Bridge and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.