Amazon CloudWatch is a native AWS monitoring tool for AWS programs. It provides data collection and resource monitoring capabilities.
$0
per canary run
Cisco Intersight
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Intersight is an operations platform that helps IT operations teams control and automate Cisco UCS, converged, and hyperconverged infrastructure. Intersight consolidates and automates infrastructure lifecycle management from data centers to the edge in one solution delivered as-a-service.
N/A
Pricing
Amazon CloudWatch
Cisco Intersight
Editions & Modules
Canaries
$0.0012
per canary run
Logs - Analyze (Logs Insights queries)
$0.005
per GB of data scanned
Over 1,000,000 Metrics
$0.02
per month
Contributor Insights - Matched Log Events
$0.02
per month per one million log events that match the rule
Logs - Store (Archival)
$0.03
per GB
Next 750,000 Metrics
$0.05
per month
Next 240,000 Metrics
$0.10
per month
Alarm - Standard Resolution (60 Sec)
$0.10
per month per alarm metric
First 10,000 Metrics
$0.30
per month
Alarm - High Resolution (10 Sec)
$0.30
per month per alarm metric
Alarm - Composite
$0.50
per month per alarm
Logs - Collect (Data Ingestion)
$0.50
per GB
Contributor Insights
$0.50
per month per rule
Events - Custom
$1.00
per million events
Events - Cross-account
$1.00
per million events
CloudWatch RUM
$1
per 100k events
Dashboard
$3.00
per month per dashboard
CloudWatch Evidently - Events
$5
per 1 million events
CloudWatch Evidently - Analysis Units
$7.50
per 1 million analysis units
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon CloudWatch
Cisco Intersight
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
With Amazon CloudWatch, there is no up-front commitment or minimum fee; you simply pay for what you use. You will be charged at the end of the month for your usage.
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon CloudWatch
Cisco Intersight
Considered Both Products
Amazon CloudWatch
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Amazon CloudWatch
We use Cloudwatch for simpler monitoring, but these metrics and logs often feed into bigger ecosystems across our organization. The metrics and logs in Cloudwatch allow our developers quick and easy access to the data they need whilst easily integrating the same data into more …
Grafana is definitely a lot better and flexible in comparison with Amazon CloudWatch for visualisation, as it offers much more options and is versatile. VictoriaMetrics and Prometheus are time-series databases which can do almost everything cloudwatch can do in a better and …
In comparison to its competitors, Amazon CloudWatch is efficient, reliable, and has a fast response time, and it maximizes an application's life while also providing the best load balance and storage. The services that Amazon CloudWatch provides are far better and cheaper for …
We have also tested with SolarWinds NPM, and Zoho Monitors. They seemed to work fine and setup was not as involved as Amazon services, JSON, etc. However, the issue of upgrades made the other solutions incur more downtime overall for maintenance and software upgrades via the …
I think there is no alternative of [Amazon] CloudWatch service. However it provides lot of glue points which you can use to show different metrics, trigger events and update your dashboards.
I believe that CloudWatch is a better solution to use with AWS services and resources in terms of cost and ease of integration with AWS infrastructure services. But keep in mind that Elasticsearch is better at aggregating application-level metrics. We chose CloudWatch because of …
We found that CloudWatch is the best solution to use with AWS services in terms of cost and ease of integration with AWS infrastructure services. While Elasticsearch is better at aggregating application-level metrics, CloudWatch wins out in its capabilities to tightly integrate …
CloudWatch is the minimum viable product that is used as your baseline. Once you graduate beyond the basic needs, there is a wide range of tools from other AWS partners that go well above and beyond. However the cost of those tools is typically considerably more.
We thought about using Logstash for capturing our data. But we encountered several configuration issues, so as I mentioned before, if you're using AWS, the best way to do this is using the service they offer, as you don't encounter configuration problems. This is why I consider …
I think Amazon has put more efforts to develop AWS CloudWatch features to monitor each kind of AWS service you can use instead of Dynatrace One Agent that just can monitor some variables of Computing services and FaaS, unless Dynatrace One Agent integration with AWS CloudWatch …
Out of the box monitoring which compliments workloads implemented from infrastructure as code so we have standardized metrics across all our monitoring for our AWS workloads. Also incredibly easy to implement via the console which can be done in minutes oppose to hours of …
We choose Amazon CloudWatch because, first, we use AWS and we need a monitoring tool. That is why we considered CloudWatch as soon as we started deploying AWS services to our company. Second, CloudWatch is a great, handy tool to monitor our services. Its strength is obvious …
Currently, we only tried and used Cloud Watch, but for AWS it is perfect. Since this is an Amazon product monitoring Amazon services, integration is great. If we decide in the future to move away from AWS, we would reconsider changing alarm monitoring. AWS can be costly …
Amazon CloudWatch is fully integrated into your existing AWS account, and provides easy hooks into several different services to make a cohesive infrastructure. Unfortunately, using other services will not allow you to get into the weeds to do everything Amazon CloudWatch can …
CloudWatch is incredibly cheap compared to new relic and much more intuitive and easy to use than Nagios. It requires no setup, expertise, or otherwise extensive knowledge to use.
We used to use Miscosoft Azure, however when we came across Amazon CloudWatch, and all the features it can provide, it seemd no brainer to switch. We transitioned from Azure to CloudWatch within 2 years of using Azure, And may not go back. Hopefully Amazon will keep adding more …
Amazon CloudWatch is great in terms of the CloudWatch Logs feature, it integrates easily with other AWS services (CloudFormation, S3, Lambda, etc.) and is reasonably low cost, so it was a no-brainer for that area. For alerting, CloudWatch didn't offer much in the way of …
I feel that CloudWatch will always remain the backbone of log analytics, events, and alarms. However, we can use other products in conjunction with it for better log analytics and monitoring. In my organization, we also ingest logs from CloudWatch to Splunk and ELK. This way we …
To manage multiple environments, each of the environments has to be specifically accessed, whereas Cisco Intersight reduces the complexity and provides a single pane.
Our organisation has some experience with Dell OME (the centralised management plane for Dell PowerEdge server, equivalent to Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service and UCS Manager, but not enough to contrast the two or say why one is better than the other.
The simple reason is we use Cisco Data center products and there is no other products that can offer these features for Cisco products other than Cisco Intersight.
I personally think that Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service is at the top of its class when it comes to managing data center hardware. The cloud-connected design feels very modern and easy to use. The mobile app is something I wouldn't expect to get in a server management …
It has strong integration with cisco Solutions. Using cisco intersight you have fully managable environment. It is must have for cisco infratructure. For cisco usc serwera it is best choise becouse of deep integration and really great functionality. You can do things faster, …
Since Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service is cloud-delivered, there is a great deal of flexibility found in this platform, including the ability to manage infrastructure from anywhere at any time. Cisco is also able to continually upgrade, modify, and enhance this platform, …
I really dont have a true comparison as we have just started down the path of managing our datacenters with Intersight vs UCSM. I can see where Intersight has a better/easier UI in terms of the workflow to create polices/templates ect.
When we compared it to our existing solution for managing our compute platforms we needed multiple tools to accomplish what we were able to accomplish with Cisco Intersight. We needed a tool just to manage our chassis/blade infrastructure, another to manager our SANs and then …
We compared this to the Dell offering of something similar and it was no contest. With Dell all the firmware, package management, updates, etc are all managed with separate products. You're tasked with building you own repositories of software, drivers, and firmware and …
I think that intersight is a more mature product, with little to no installation overhead. Its interface is easier to use. Also features workload optimization and vulnerability advisories that are not present in cloud forms.
Intersight does not require any on-prem infrastructure deployment. No need to worry about patching or updates to any appliances or software. Other solutions must constantly be deployed and maintained by IT staff.
We use the Dell OpenManage product previously when we were using Dell servers. Cisco Intersight has much more capabilities than Dell OpenManage had in the past. I haven't used any other product lately which would allow me to compare the features. We use What's up gold for …
If you use any AWS services, CloudWatch is the natural choice to monitor & troubleshoot your workload. Thankfully, for most AWS services, CloudWatch is either built-in or very easy to set up. However, being proficient in browsing & tracking the log events would take some training & practice. Having some experienced people on the team would help immensely, especially in spreading the skill to the rest of the team.
Cisco Intersight is very well suited for doing firmware upgrades across all of your cisco hardware. So far we have had no problems pushing out new firmware. It's also well suited for hardware management. Cisco TAC has the ability to pull logs for the IMC for themselves, which saves you from having to pull the logs yourself and then uploading them to the case. It may or may not be appropriate for upgrading operating systems. I have not been able to test it.
It provides lot many out of the box dashboard to observe the health and usage of your cloud deployments. Few examples are CPU usage, Disk read/write, Network in/out etc.
It is possible to stream CloudWatch log data to Amazon Elasticsearch to process them almost real time.
If you have setup your code pipeline and wants to see the status, CloudWatch really helps. It can trigger lambda function when certain cloudWatch event happens and lambda can store the data to S3 or Athena which Quicksight can represent.
Standardising the environment by enforcing use of updating templates.
Show the difference on a profile between what has changed and what setting was last deployed.
Perform bulk deploy operation on profiles (like server profiles).
Policies underpin all settings (e.g. no more defining individual VLANs before being able to use them, or having to clean them up manually when they are no longer in use. You deploy a Domain VLAN policy that states which VLANs are configured on a domain (either standalone) or a domain profile template (if domains profiles are bound to an updating domain profile template).
Memory metrics on EC2 are not available on CloudWatch. Depending on workloads if we need visibility on memory metrics we use Solarwinds Orion with the agent installed. For scalable workloads, this involves customization of images being used.
Visualization out of the box. But this can easily be addressed with other solutions such as Grafana.
By design, this is only used for AWS workloads so depending on your environment cannot be used as an all in one solution for your monitoring.
It is difficult to spot an added or removed VLAN in an Ethernet Network Group Policy or VLAN Policy. The comparison widget will show you that something has changed, but if you have 100s of VLANs, the difference does not stand out. Workaround: we copy the data out and compare it in a text editor.
If you are transitioning from UMM to IMM, you lose some functionality like vNIC redundancy pairs.
It is not easy to map the UMM version 4.x server firmware version to the equivalent IMM version 5.x firmware version.
It is not possible to configure out-of-band management IP addresses on a per-domain basis. You have to configure these ranges via an IMC Access policy (which contains the IP address range/pool) on the server profile. This leads to "server profile template sprawl" where we have to maintain multiple server profile templates since our domains sit on different ranges, even though the servers are for the most part configured identically.
UCS domains in IMM only support one Ethernet Network Group Policy (VLAN group) per vNIC template.
Been using Cisco Software as a service (SaaS) platform in a production environment for a large medical and health professionals that has critical healthcare and patients care dependency.
Support team is very helpful getting system updated as needed, and vendor support is fantastic. Also get a dedicated Cisco networking engine to review and advise system health and recommendations.
Although the tool itself is easy to integrate and is readily available for use, it has its limitations. The key limitations of cloudwatch are with respect to cost incurred on log retention and log querying. While for key use cases this is sufficient, for more advanced use cases, Amazon CloudWatch doesn't work out. Also, obviously it is tightly coupled with AWS, which makes you look away if you need a single tool for all monitoring
Usability of Cisco Intersight is highly dependent on the licensing purchased. The default (free) license level provides a lot of value for the minimal amount of effort to implement. The paid license levels provide additional features (detailed inventory, configuration management and deployment, etc.)
Support is effective, and we were able to get any problems that we couldn't get solved through community discussion forums solved for us by the AWS support team. For example, we were assisted in one instance where we were not sure about the best metrics to use in order to optimize an auto-scaling group on EC2. The support team was able to look at our metrics and give a useful recommendation on which metrics to use.
If you have bigger problems with the on-prem version, the support team is sometimes a bit slow in their reactions and you have to keep going, to get your help. But finally, all problems, that we have addressed, have been resolved to my full appreciation!
We use Cloudwatch for simpler monitoring, but these metrics and logs often feed into bigger ecosystems across our organization. The metrics and logs in Cloudwatch allow our developers quick and easy access to the data they need whilst easily integrating the same data into more prominent platforms for wider analysis, including Service desk support, SecOps, and ITOps monitoring within the organization.
Our organisation has some experience with Dell OME (the centralised management plane for Dell PowerEdge server, equivalent to Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service and UCS Manager, but not enough to contrast the two or say why one is better than the other.
The negative thing is that we prefer to use the UCS Manager in our company because this bare metal is integrated into the FI and no extra appliance is required. SaaS is generally not viewed favorably in Germany.
Telling the user that they have to buy Intersight licenses even if they use UCS Manager annoys our customers.