PRTG Network Monitor Reviews

The solution is for network monitoring.

Overall it is a very good tool to use. 

The bandwidth monitoring is a very attractive feature, it can tell you the bandwidth utilization while it is attempting to connect to the host for feedback.

It has the capability to discover a lot of information over the networks automatically.

Network monitoring is not the strongest area of the solution which should be improved. It is not the best tool of the application but if someone has to start from the beginning and reach a moderate level of abilities for monitoring, then PRTG still serves that purpose. For experts, it is not the application monitoring tool they would choose. This tool is more suited for beginners and intermediate users.

The solution has to evolve as an end-to-end monitoring solution. It has to do better at understanding the application at the deepest level.

The performance of the monitoring is outdated and when they have upgraded the tools in the past, it slows down the performance.

Auto Discover features could improve by allowing people the choice to manipulate the discovery to design and customize it to create a technical map of the services dependent on each of them.

They should also add service monitoring. They currently have a Windows service, but they do not have monitoring as a separate service. If I would like to specifically monitor the service within Windows, I would have no choice but to use theirs. 

I have been using the solution for approximately ten years.

It is a stable solution. I did not see any challenges. However, the performance is not that good. When asked about stability, I will split it into two parts. When I go into the devices and I click on the devices, I should see all the devices immediately, I do not, which is a performance issue. When I click on one of the devices in the list of All Devices section, it should show me the graph and the monitoring statistics site. This is where it has failed many times, it does not show it. We complained about this to PRTG many times. I currently find the solution to be 80% stable.

The scalability should come deep within the roots of the solution. The root of PRTG is having a lot of sensors inside because they work on monitoring sensors. The more sensors you have, the more you can scale. The good thing about the solution is that you can make your own sensors. This means it is scalable.

I did not have a good experience with customer service. They were not able to give answers in a timely manner. They were able to give some less complex answers but when the questions become difficult, they find it very difficult to manage a solution. For example, what do bandwidth monitoring and bandwidth sensor mean? I think they should be able to explain this to me better, they could not explain it well. Their bandwidth sensors do not really work as a bandwidth sensor.

I think they might have some missing knowledge or they have unqualified employees sitting down and reading the documents from their screen to the customers, like myself. I find that technical support could have been much better, they have been a company for many years. They need to continue to support their customers in a much better way and should hire experts as other organizations do. When contacting support it is handled by the very first level of agents, then it is escalation up for an answer. I did not like this about the support, it takes time. I find myself left trying to solve the problem myself.

The technical support requires a lot of improvements, they offer a lot of information to be downloaded and used by the customer. I think it has to be supported much better to allow customers the ability to easily deploy it and use it effectively.

I did not have any challenges attempting to install the solution. It was quite straightforward, you do not need any training to install it. The experience was good.

The deployment is the longest part of the setup. I would say the installation did not take much time but the complete utilization of the software took three or four hours. I had to configure it properly, discover the sensor, support the sensor, utilize it to the best possible way, make a group, and put in the site. All of these processes take time. If somebody has experience in PRTG, I think it can be done in half day.

I have evaluated SolarWinds and it is one of the easiest for beginners to start working with network monitoring.

I would recommend this solution to others. However, if they are a beginner, there are other products out there that might be more appropriate, like SolarWinds.

I rate PRTG Network Monitor a seven out of ten.

We are using the latest update.

We use the solution for our firewall interface and bandwidth monitoring.

The solution may be modified to meet one's requirements. Mine are simply for SNMP bandwidth monitoring for my network interfaces. Others may have different needs when it comes to the solution. 

The capabilities the solution provides us meet our needs. We feel the solution and its features to be valuable.

We like the alerting system, the SNMP monitoring and the customization of the bandwidth. It dives deeply into the information concerning metrics. These are the reasons we chose to go with the solution. 

The automation should be improved. I am talking about automation by code and processes and provisioning the IP desk. Should the automation capabilities be addressed, I would raise my rating from an eight to a ten out of ten. 

We have been using PRTG Network Monitor for many years. 

The solution has good performance and I find it to be stable. 

The solution suits our scalability needs. We also onboard many other systems. 

We have our own technical team. As such, there has been no need for us to be in touch with technical support. 

Prior to the solution, we made use of Zabbix and continue to do so in respect of customers and management. We also tried out another product. 

The initial setup was simple, really straightforward.

Our team handled the entire setup, internally. 

Of course, the solution requires maintenance once deployed, as does every software in respect of upgrade, configuration and data backup requirements. This is part of one's product governance. 

Our price involves less than 5,000 tiers.

We are satisfied with the price. 

When software version releases come out, we simply install and upgrade them. 

The solution is cloud-based. We hosted our platform into our own cloud infrastructure.

For the moment, we are not looking for integration with other products. 

There are, perhaps, 25 users making use of the solution in our organization.

The solution boasts good performance. 

I would certainly recommend the solution to others. 

I rate PRTG Network Monitor as an eight out of ten. 

PRTG Network Monitor can improve Layer 2 and Layer 3 network maps and the GUI more user-friendly. Additionally, they should bundle the features so I can monitor everything on one particular device.

I have been using PRTG Network Monitor for over one year.

PRTG Network Monitor is stable.

The scalability of PRTG Network Monitor is good. We only need to buy licenses from PRTG Network Monitor and add more devices or sites, or customers to it. It is easy.

We have four technicians and one senior technician using PRTG Network Monitor. If something goes down, they can see the problem and then either go to the site or approach the situation remotely.

The support from PRTG Network Monitor has been reliable. They have been available when we need them.

The initial setup of PRTG Network Monitor is simple. Adding a device for monitoring only takes a few minutes. The technician can add a device to monitor without problems.

The price of PRTG Network Monitor is reasonable for the features that the solution provides. They charge you per monitoring, not per node, it is per port that you need for a device.

If they could have pricing per device that would be a benefit.

My advice to others is if you can't afford SolarWinds and those other expensive solutions, PRTG Network Monitor is the best value for money.

I rate PRTG Network Monitor an eight out of ten.

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.

We are a system integrator and this is one of the monitoring products that we implement for our clients.

Our customers use it for monitoring their networks.

The most valuable feature is autodiscovery.

Most of the sensors are available for it, such as traffic sensors and SNMP sensors. They have a very wide library that we can use.

From a view perspective, it should be more customizable.

Other monitoring tools that I have used are easier to use.

I have been working with PRTG Network Monitor for two months. The company has been using it for approximately two years.

Over the approximately two years that the company has been using this product, it has been very stable.

This is a scalable product. We have six people in the company that use it.

I have specific requirements for data that I have to gather. Of more than 400 data points that are available, I only need approximately 40. So, at this point, I'm only utilizing about 10% of the capability.

We have asked questions of their technical support and they have a very good response time. They immediately jump in and solve any issues that we have, as well as answer our inquiries.

I would rate the technical support a four out of five.

In the past, I have worked with a lot of different monitoring tools.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

The licensing fees are billed annually and there are no costs in addition to this.

We evaluated several other solutions and one of the reasons that we chose PRTG is because they provided us with a free trial that included all of the sensors. This gives you the opportunity to test the product and see it work. After that, if you are satisfied with it, you can purchase it.

The other solutions that we tried will give you only a few sensors. You do not have the full functionality of the system available for testing.

Overall, this is a good product but there are other monitoring tools that are easier to use.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

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.

Our primary use case is for monitoring numerous services; internet providers, university campuses, etc. We are resellers. 

It's great that we can create a dashboard inside software monitoring, and access many other websites, it is a complete monitoring solution.

I'd like to see the inventory of the device improved. 

I've been using this solution for six years. 

The solution is very stable. 

The technical support is fine, I've never had a problem. 

Deployment was completed within a day. 

I recommend this solution and rate it a 10 out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution in order to monitor the network performance and stability.

The pricing of the solution is pretty good. We don't find it too unreasonable. It's pretty compatible if you look at it in comparison to the competition.

The solution offers good integration capabilities.

The initial setup was easy. We didn't have any issues with the process and everything rolled out smoothly.

Their penetration within the market could be much better. If their pricing was lower, even though it's reasonable now, it might help them achieve this.

The solution needs a better graphical grid. A good example of what I mean is SolarWinds, which has an excellent graphical grid. It would help with organizations that have a bit more complexity.

I've been working with the solution for the last ten years. It's been a decade. I've worked with the product for a long time.

The stability seems to be quite reliable. It's a good product. I can't comment on dealing with any bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

I've never personally had the chance to contact technical support. Having never reached out directly, it would be hard to discuss their knowledgeability or responsiveness.

We found the initial setup to be pretty straightforward. It wasn't too complex. We didn't have any trouble setting everything up.

We handled the implementation ourselves, in-house. We didn't need to hire any outside consultants or integrators.

The pricing of the solution is fair and in line with the rest of the market. It's not too high.

While I didn't properly evaluate SolarWinds, I have seen other people using it and I found that it had a very nice graphical grid and GUI.

We only use the product ourselves. We're end-users and customers, not resellers or consultants.

For smaller networks, I would recommend this solution. That said, if the network is complex, I would recommend a company evaluates another product instead. Something like SolarWinds may be a better option in cases of complexity. It's not the scalability, rather graphically, the GUI you get in terms of displays and things of that nature look much better in SolarWinds. I should preface this recommendation by saying that I have not used it. I've seen people using it. I feel that looks much better and would be better suited based on what I have seen.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten. If it had a better graphical grid similar to SolarWinds, I would rate it higher.