No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

NETSCOUT Network & Application Observability vs Opmantek NMIS comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 12, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

NETSCOUT Network & Applicat...
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (46th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (29th), Network Troubleshooting (12th), Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) (11th)
Opmantek NMIS
Ranking in Network Monitoring Software
102nd
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Network Monitoring Software category, the mindshare of NETSCOUT Network & Application Observability is 3.8%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Opmantek NMIS is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Monitoring Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
NETSCOUT Network & Application Observability3.8%
Opmantek NMIS0.3%
Other95.9%
Network Monitoring Software
 

Featured Reviews

HT
Newwork And Collaboration Supervisor at Nafeza
Monitoring has improved bandwidth insights and application diagnosis but setup and costs still need work
They need room for improvement about the spare parts. There are shortages in Egypt in their stock. We tried to make RMA for specific parts, and it took a long time. Comparing this to a vendor like Cisco, who provides any component next business day, NETSCOUT nGeniusONE took a long time. This needs more improvement. I believe it is expensive. They need to reduce its budget a little bit. Comparing to other solutions, it is very expensive.
it_user855840 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Flexible device polling times and extensible modules are key features for me
There are lots of reasons why I'm using it. The installer itself is basically something that can be used as a no-questions-asked type of installer. I can use it with automation tools like Chef and Puppet. I don't have to answer some random questions. I can worry about all that stuff later on in the configuration. It allows for variable polling times of devices on the network. Because it's all in text, in general, that obviously makes it easier from the automation perspective as well, to modify configuration on the fly, using Puppet and those kind of tools. It does have different modules, so you can extend the solution as you need it, or get as little as you need in the beginning, so you don't have to buy a full set of modules. You just buy what you need and expand later on.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The best feature is when we have it connected permanently via TAPs. That enables us to constantly collect data and then we can go back in time... To be able to rewind, back in time, and see the problem as it happened, is very helpful."
"The generation of KPI-like information that feeds to the nGeniusONE (management) server is the most valuable feature."
"A great feature is the memory utilization graph."
"We use TruView primarily for network performance analysis and monitoring. It helps us track traffic, flows, packets, and bandwidth to understand our network's condition and detect any anomalies or attacks. However, the product's age limits its advanced features for performance analysis. The main advantage lies in its low cost and reliable functionality, as we have a permanent license and do not require support. Real-time monitoring in TruView is somewhat limited, as there is a delay of about five minutes in data updates, making it less effective for immediate insights."
"It's easy to detect unwanted traffic with all the detection tools available."
"This solution provides us with increased visibility while conducting an IT deployment, and when we have any type of outage and we dig into it, we are able to tell what the root cause is instead of having to go through Wireshark, etc."
"It is very rock solid, and we hardly have any hardware issues."
"It is a scalable product."
"The installer itself is basically something that can be used as a no-questions-asked type of installer. I can use it with automation tools like Chef and Puppet. I don't have to answer some random questions. I can worry about all that stuff later on in the configuration."
"It does have different modules, so you can extend the solution as you need it, or get as little as you need in the beginning, so you don't have to buy a full set of modules. You just buy what you need and expand later on."
"In my case, I prefer to only poll interfaces that have descriptions, and the ones that don't have descriptions, I don't really want to know about them. It does allow for all these bits and pieces and adjustments, and fine tuning to get it to a point where it works for my needs."
"It allows for variable polling times of devices on the network. Because it's all in text, in general, that obviously makes it easier from the automation perspective as well, to modify configuration on the fly, using Puppet and those kind of tools."
"I think it compares very well to all the solutions in what it offers, and also I think compared to some of them, it is much more reliable."
"The big thing is the event management engine, which is really, really nice to use, and it comes at a reasonable price, unlike some of the competitors like Netcool from IBM. Those kinds of tools are hugely expensive and they come as resource-heavy types of solutions. This obviously doesn't require as much hardware, but it does offer similar benefits where you can manage all the events."
 

Cons

"It can be scalable. It just costs too much."
"There is a big issue with the special way they use InfiniStream to store data."
"The scalability needs some work. From a probe perspective, we are limited to a certain amount of throughput on the devices themselves. Without having actual hooks into the bare metal hardware for the solutions, it's a bit of a "thumb in the air" as to when we hit our capacity or when our high watermark is."
"On a network the size of ours, the loading times seem a little extensive, 20 or 30 seconds to load up some graphs."
"While it is good, the single pane of glass view is too high level. It is better for management or someone doing sanity checks. A lot of times, I need to go deeper into the additional screens to get what I want out of it."
"I would like for it to have a smaller footprint of the virtual appliance and better performance."
"The GUI has gotten better over time but there could be some improvement in how the GUI is built."
"I would like to see an improved level of stitching between IPs."
"These kinds of solutions are more node- or device-based solutions. It would be nice in the future if they could be more data-oriented, so it would be easier for me to pull different stats based on ad-hoc requirements; but in a big, centralized database where I can pull specific things, and mix and match the way I want to."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license becomes cost prohibitive very quickly."
"Cost is probably the biggest drawback. Compared to some of the newer vendors that have popped up in the space, it's definitely more on the expensive side... [But] it's been able to keep its value, even in the face of the cheaper competition."
"This solution has saved us more than $50,000 a month and freed up 30 percent of our bandwidth."
"Like any company, we always want better pricing. The pricing is okay, but it's not a cheap solution. When you want to deploy it across an enterprise as large as ours, you go into seven figures. It's not a cheap solution to get out there."
"It is very expensive, but it's well worth the money."
"I don't know what the cost to buy the solution was, but I doubt if it's a significant part of the budget as far as the maintenance and support are concerned."
"This product could be cheaper."
"I rate the price of NETSCOUT nGeniusONE a four out of five."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Monitoring Software solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise59
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the best DDoS protection solution for a big ISP for monitoring and mitigating?
I would say if it’s an ISP that will build a scrubbing center, Netscout/Arbor is a good solution. In all other solutions, Imperva is a great choice.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NETSCOUT nGeniusONE?
Regarding its high price, I give NETSCOUT nGeniusONE a seven.
What needs improvement with NETSCOUT nGeniusONE?
They need room for improvement about the spare parts. There are shortages in Egypt in their stock. We tried to make RMA for specific parts, and it took a long time. Comparing this to a vendor like ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

NETSCOUT nGenius, NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, NETSCOUT nGeniusPULSE, NETSCOUT vSTREAM, NETSCOUT InfiniStreamNG, TruView
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cerner Corporation
Telmex, John Deere, Three Network.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Auvik, SolarWinds and others in Network Monitoring Software. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.