We compared Zabbix and ScienceLogic across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Zabbix is highly regarded for its user-friendly interface, scalability, and reliable performance. It provides customizable dashboards, trigger dependencies, SNMP monitoring, and problem tracking. ScienceLogic is highly regarded for its serverless and agent connectivity, versatile graphs and personalized dashboards, AIOps and event management capabilities, as well as its AI and machine learning features.
Room for Improvement: Zabbix could reduce false positives and improve integration, cloud monitoring, and reporting. ScienceLogic can enhance its documentation, Power Packs, notification features, and automation options.
Service and Support: Users had mixed opinions about Zabbix customer service. Some found it helpful, while others feel it needs improvement. Customers generally rely on online documentation and community forums for assistance. ScienceLogic's customer service is generally considered responsive and professional. However, a few users reported delayed response times and support engineers with limited expertise.
Ease of Deployment: The complexity of Zabbix's initial setup varies, and it may require an experienced group of administrators and engineers. ScienceLogic's initial setup is described as simple and efficient. The deployment process can be completed within a few hours or a couple of weeks.
Pricing: Zabbix is a free, open-source solution, but users can purchase support services and additional features. Opinions on the price of ScienceLogic were mixed. Pricing is determined by the number of network devices or endpoints, and there are no hidden charges.
ROI: Users say that Zabbix provides a cost-effective solution. ScienceLogic improves troubleshooting and minimizes network outages.
Comparison Results: Zabbix is a highly customizable open-source solution with a wide range of monitoring capabilities, including the ability to monitor virtual machines and databases. However, Zabbix’s setup can be complex and may require technical expertise. ScienceLogic is praised for its serverless and agent connectivity, effortless setup, and customized dashboards. However, it lacks detailed documentation and automation options.
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"It is simple."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"Its ITSM and EMS combination is really amazing. There is no need to purchase two products, one for ITSM and a second for EMS/NMS."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"The flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"It has an intuitive UI with beautiful graphs and customizable maps."
"Setup was straightforward. Initial deployment took two or three months."
"It provides high scalability, alerting, notification, templating, and end-to-end security."
"The solution allows for good integration with other products."
"It not only provides the preconfigured item monitoring feature, but it is also easy to configure custom items."
"The most valuable feature is service assurance."
"The most valuable features in Zabbix are those that help us overcome bottlenecks in CPU usage, as well as reduce memory delay. I know that we have only reached the tip of the iceberg of what Zabbix's features can do for us, and we have not used all of them yet."
"Simple network monitoring that is easy to install and manage."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"Addressing duplicate IPs: There is the ability to edit the DB and fix this, but adding some logic to understand them would be a plus."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"Its UI should be improved. They did some improvements in version 5, but it could benefit from some more work. Its integrations should also be improved. They've been active for one year, and they seem to have noticed that. It has new integrations, but it could benefit from more integrations. As far as I know, there is no model to push statistics, metrics, or events towards Zabbix. This type of API isn't yet there, whereas some other tools provide an API for this."
"If Zabbix had a better dashboard then it would be nice."
"The APM monitoring has room for improvement, although I hear that the new 5.2 version has some improvements in that area, and I'd like to give that a go. I would like to see a few more templates out there for different styles of monitoring. I use the Grafana interface for reporting. I would also like it to have an out-of-the-box ability to email reports. You can create reports, but to be able to email those reports would be really helpful. I've got users who are not interested in logging in and generating a report. They want it all pre-canned and sent to an email address. It would also be really handy if we could pin certain reports up onto platforms such as Teams or SharePoint. A GUI for the proxy server would be cool to have for debugging purposes and for the support teams to have a look at, but I don't know whether that's really feasible to do. I get enough from the log files themselves."
"They should open an SSH session from the web interface."
"Having a more customizable interface and dashboard would be an improvement."
"I am having difficulties connecting it to Grafana, as well as some of the other plugins like Kibana."
"Implementation is always tailored to the customer and the kind of information we need from the client to carry it out can make them very uncomfortable. Sometimes the clients are not ready to share it."
"There are areas of improvement. The database grows really fast. So, when you install Zabbix, you have to deal with some issues, like the database. We become pretty big very fast."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
ScienceLogic is ranked 14th in Network Monitoring Software with 42 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 1st in Network Monitoring Software with 101 reviews. ScienceLogic is rated 8.6, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and ServiceNow Discovery, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, SolarWinds NPM, Nagios Core and Nagios XI. See our ScienceLogic vs. Zabbix report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Server Monitoring vendors, and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
