PRTG Network Monitor Reviews

Our clients use this solution to see if the network is up and running, for pings and services such as emails and disk space.

I use it for monitoring since I am the system admin to keep things up. Overall, the information it gave didn't offer any suggestions to change anything.

The up-to-date graphs and the history are very good.

They keep adding services, such as MS SQL monitoring, and email monitoring to keep the different parts of the e-mails going.

The implementation is easy, initially.

Also, the servicing of Linux and Windows Operating Systems are useful.

The free version only gives us 100 free sensors to use. It would be nice if there was double that.

The additional services such as MS SQL and email monitoring took a bit of work, so I would like to see it easier to do.

I have been acquainted with PRTG Network Monitor for approximately seven years.

I have used it for a customer in the last 12 months.

We are using the latest version. I keep them updated.

It's a stable product and I have not experienced any issues. 

Our clients are not that large. It's single-server monitoring for some systems. We didn't have to scale it.

Our clients are small businesses, with under 100 seats.

We have not needed to contact technical support, but the forums are pretty good.

We did not use technical support because it was pretty straightforward. I kept my monitoring pretty simplistic, and I didn't try to do anything extra that would cause more angst and set things up.

We haven't used a monitoring system before.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy to set up and implement.

To have the additional features costs a lot. It's too much. If it was half the price, we would purchase more.

All monitoring systems are close to the same pricing scheme.

For others who are interested in using this solution, I would recommend it. Please use it, it's good. It's very friendly, easy to use, and it's web-based, which means you don't have to be logged into a server to get something done.

Also, the updates are easy to do, just double click and away it went. On occasion, updates had to be done from the server, but that wasn't very often.

I would rate PRTG Network Monitor a nine out of ten.

It is for monitoring the up/down of our core infrastructure: Internally, the edge routers in our major occupancies, core switches, access switches, etc. It sort of give us real-time feedback for what is going on.

We use it to determine if a switch is up, our traffic is running optimally or at a normal rate.

We set up the solution, and it provided us with feedback on our IT infrastructure instantaneously. Because of the sensors that we are using, the graph started populating straightaway. Also, Pings and SNMPs were coming back straightaway. So, within 24 hours, we had a days worth of logs to look through.

Yesterday, we were having an issue with one of our major occupancies. We were able to quickly determine whether or not it was because of network performance. Because we could literally just look at the graph and screen on our wallboard, and say, "It wasn't because of network utilization." 

It is easy to rule things out, or say, "Because we had this huge spike it traffic, it maxed out our line. Therefore, it was a bandwidth problem."

The real-time monitoring and alerting are its most valuable features. 

Sometimes, it is difficult to drill down further to get information, e.g., if we saw spike in traffic, then we would want to drill down and find out what is causing that spike in traffic. Now, it could be because of the way we're using it, but we find that it' difficult to do, which is why we are using another product for this.

SolarWinds has server application monitors (SAMs), which we are using to check our processes on critical systems to see if they were to go down that we would get an alert for it. Because it's all network-based, it would be great if this was something that we could have included.

I have never seen it go down. I think it has only ever gone down when I have been messing with it and caused it to go down. The solution is nice and stable.

The scalability is really good. At one point, I did enable a sort of clustering and found that much easier than SolarWinds. 

SolarWinds clustering is an absolute nightmare, whereas clustering with PRTG, was ridiculously simple. In order to scale and add more load balancing, PRTG was a lot smoother and quicker to do it. 

Obviously, there are different levels. We're currently limited to 100 sensors, but if we were to purchase an enhanced version of it, we could scale to whatever we purchased.

I haven't used the technical support. I haven't needed them.

We were actually using PRTG before we were using SolarWinds. From the feature side of things, I don't think that we ever fully implemented and tested PRTG. Then, we started testing SolarWinds and found SolarWinds was giving us a more detailed reporting. So, that is the avenue we went down for actually purchasing a product. We chose SolarWinds, but we still keep a hold of PRTG for its real-time stuff.

We just installed it, then started configuring sensors. That was about it. There wasn't much to it.

We set it up in-house.

The historical data does not help us optimize our network performance, as we are not really using it to that level. We could, but because we are only on the free version, we have a limited number of sensors. Therefore, we are not monitoring as much as we want to be to obtain historical information.

We also have monitoring with SolarWinds, as well. What we find is that SolarWinds is great for reporting and delving back into logs, but PRTG is better for that instant on knowing what is going on right now.

There are quite a wide array of different sensors with PRTG. However, we are only really utilizing SNMP, Ping, and similar functions at the moment. Because our NetFlow data goes into SolarWind, we want that report inside it. We find SolarWinds better for this. Though, we know that we could do this if we wanted and put some NetFlow data into PRTG with its multiple different sensors.

We are not using the solution to its fullest capacity. At this point, I don't think we will because we are so involved with SolarWinds. We are getting out of PRTG what we want to get out of it, but we are not getting enough from it that we could ditch SolarWinds and move over to it.

For the solutions features that we are using, they are great. We have no issues with the feature set.

I don't think we've ever used the desktop app, as I didn't know there was a desktop app. We just use the web.

We primarily use the solution as a monitoring tool. We use it mostly for looking at changes in the resources' behavior. Pretty much it's the use we have primarily. The second one is to provide a report of the total consumption of the resources that we use. We pretty much have to monitor systems.

We haven't played with many options. I know it offers a lot of different plugins for certain solutions, such as a VPN monitor and also website monitor. We haven't configured those as we are under the management direction, and if they don't allow it, pretty much we use the options that we have and the plan for the department. 

The simplicity of the software is great.

The configuration is not hard to handle. 

The installation is not that complex. 

The best part of the tool is the simplicity of the tool itself.

The product can scale well.

The database needs improvement. They use plain text for the data. That's probably not a concern for them, however, sometimes we need to enhance some of the reports and we cannot do that. If they move to a transactional database, it will be better for users to get access to different kinds of reports. Right now, it's pretty straightforward in terms of what you can do, and you cannot apply customization or get specific data.

They have something called maps where you can configure or set up a view for the different devices. They have different options than the ones that we have, such as a pie chart option, and likely offer different kinds of graphs. It would be nice to show you the real-time status using these graphs. 

We've been using the solution for about three years at this point. 

The stability is great. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is good.

The scalability of the product is quite good.

I contacted technical support in the past. The few times I got a pretty straightforward answer, although the service was probably not the fastest. It was by email, which can be less immediate than a phone call. In general, however, it was good.

We're also using OneView for HPE BladeSystem for monitoring.

The product was easy to implement. The simplicity of the tool is the key to successful sales on this monitoring solution. All the options are straightforward for the users as well. It's not that complex to implement.

To fully deploy the solution into our environment took a couple of days.

We're using the latest version of the solution. We updated the version less than a month ago.

I'd advise potential new users, if they are looking for an easy tool to deploy and manage, it's the way to go. If they are looking for complex reports, I will say stay away from this product.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We are using this solution for the health check of our infrastructure.

It is user-friendly. It is easy to set up health checks within PRTG and use scans. It is like a self-service tool, and anyone can configure their own settings within PRTG.

In our organization, we encounter performance issues with our PRTG probe service. I saw documentation from the vendor or Paessler mentioning that there are limitations for WMI sensors. Other than that, we are okay with PRTG.

I have been using this solution for almost two years.

It is stable.

Its scalability is fine. We have between 300 to 500 people. We have plans to increase its usage.

Their support is good. We can easily reach out to the vendor or the Paessler support team.

When I started with my company, they were already using PRTG and SCOM. PRTG is more user-friendly than SCOM. I prefer PRTG over SCOM, but it also depends on the use case.

The pricing for PRTG in our case is reasonable because we have a lot of applications to monitor within PRTG. It is not that expensive.

I would rate PRTG Network Monitor a nine out of 10.

The solution is easy to manage and the reports are very accurate.

There is room for improvement in this solution for the performance and third-party monitoring protocols. They need to be updated to the latest ones.

I have been using this solution for five years.

The solution is stable in my experience.

I have found the scalability to be good. Most of my clients have been medium-size businesses using this solution.

The technical support needs some improvement. The response time is slow, we normally get a response the next business day for urgent issues which is long time.

I have used Cisco solutions in the past. The main difference when comparing Cisco and this solution is Cisco supports Cisco Prime and this solution does not. This is the disadvantage if you want to use Cisco Prime. However, this solution is open sourced which has its benefits over Cisco.

The installation is straightforward.

My advice to those wanting to purchase a monitoring solution with simple and easy-to-use features, go with this solution. It is a good option, especially for medium businesses.

I rate PRTG Network Monitor a seven out of ten.

RTG Network Monitor is used for monitoring many parts of our network, such as IP telephone system, internet traffic, firewall, and network utilization. Additionally, it can monitor server information, for example, CPU and memory usage.

I found PRTG Network Monitor very useful for troubleshooting and monitoring the utilization of either the network or server.

PRTG Network Monitor could improve by having a feature to allow uploading of preset standard network switch configurations and the ability to monitor the SLA configuration, such as uptime for the switches or internet connectivity. This would be very useful.

I have been using PRTG Network Monitor for approximately five years.

The solution is stable.

PRTG Network Monitor is scalable, I can add more network components if I was to need them.

This solution is best fitted for small to medium-sized businesses.

I have not needed to contact technical support.

The initial installation was easy and it took approximately two weeks to cover all the network components.

I can do the implementation of the solution myself.

I rate PRTG Network Monitor an eight out of ten.

We use it for monitoring items on the network: switches, servers, and other devices, to guarantee or at least monitor uptime.

It has provided us with early warning for potential issues and has stopped potential downtime before it occurs. It also reduces the amount of wasted time that comes with dealing with things after the fact, so scheduled maintenance can be more easily performed.

It provides us with needed feedback on our IT infrastructure by telling us whether things are up, what the current usage is, and whether we need to plan to modify that. It tells us whether there are spikes in usage that either need to be addressed within the application, based on additional resourcing for the application, or at the server level.

The most valuable feature is the alerting when there's downtime. 

Also, the feature whereby it shows when my hard drives are moving towards thresholds that would be considered outages, before they reach that point - that is valuable. That's the main thing we want out of it, a warning.

The Desktop app is fine, it's easy enough to use, it installs relatively easily. It's lightweight, it sits in the corner, and it pops up if there's a real issue. I tend to use the web interface to actually do any of the work within it. But the Desktop app sits there in the background and it works fine.

The sensors are good, there's a large availability, and they provide relevant information. The way those sensors are deployed allows you to modify and tweak them, based on what you want to achieve out of them. But you can equally remove sensors with relative ease if they automatically include things that you don't want to monitor.

I would like to see Office 365 monitoring. Essentially, it doesn't do it. I assumed not at all, but apparently it does it slightly. However, due to issues with APIs, they currently don't provide full monitoring for O365. It is something they're looking into.

I've not seen any outages with it so I'd say it's stable.

It's scaled as far as we've needed it to so far and we're planning to roll it out further. It scales perfectly fine. It's pretty easy to introduce new offices. We've got it on a core set of offices at the moment, but adding additional offices as they've been deployed has been a straightforward, easy process.

I've not had to use the tech support. I do use the online resources and, from that point of view, there seems to be a reasonably extensive knowledge library that answers any questions I've had to address.

We previously used SCOM as a solution and migrated to this because the feature set is quite similar, but it cuts out a lot of the noise and the complexity of the configuration. We started looking for other solutions which would give us something that was easier to configure whilst producing the same amount of information.

The initial setup was fine. It was straightforward enough.

I didn't personally install it so it's difficult for me to say how long it took from the time it was installed until it provided feedback on our IT infrastructure, but I assume it was within minutes of it actually being installed. The installation of the sensors is quite quick, so it would have been five minutes or ten minutes after installation.

We had somebody internally who had used the product previously at another company. They were able to install it due to intrinsic knowledge of the product.

It's possible that it has saved us money, but it's difficult to measure because it's a sort of intangible in terms of downtime and the cost of downtime, depending on the system.

We did look at a couple of other solutions, but partly because we had somebody with in-house knowledge of PRTG and ability in it, they essentially gave it reasonably good reviews from their personal usage. So we chose to go with something that was a known factor.

We would have looked at stuff like SolarWinds and some others, but off the top of my head, I can't remember which ones.

It is a good solution, one that is at least worth investigating.

The historical data provided by the solution would potentially help optimize network performance, but it's not something I directly look at so I can't really pass along an opinion on that.

Overall, the feature set looks good. It covers off a lot of what we're interested in.

I would rate PRTG at eight out of ten. It does a lot of the things that I need it to do in terms of monitoring. It provides great feedback and produces it in an easily consumable way. The caveat is that it doesn't quite cover off everything I need it to do at the moment.

Within our organization, only the network department uses this solution — there are eight of us.

It gives me a live view of the traffic on the WAN. It produces reports on errors and faulty devices. It also produces a lot of logs on what is afoot. I can produce many reports using it.

It needs to have more monitoring on end-user devices. We can monitor a set of network devices, but not end-users' devices.

It would be nice if it gave us alerts via Gmail or SMS message.

I have been using this solution for five years. 

PRTG Network Monitor is both scalable and stable.

The technical support is excellent.

The initial setup is very straightforward — it's just a simple cover server.

We are currently evaluating many other security solutions.

I would recommend this solution because it's great for monitoring network traffic and producing reports.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine.