Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Checkmk vs Zabbix: What are the differences?
Key differences between Checkmk and Zabbix
Checkmk and Zabbix are two popular network monitoring solutions that offer different features and functionalities. Here are the key differences between them:
Scalability: Checkmk is more scalable compared to Zabbix when it comes to handling large-scale environments. With its distributed monitoring architecture and efficient handling of thousands of hosts and services, Checkmk is suitable for organizations with extensive monitoring needs. On the other hand, Zabbix can also handle a significant number of hosts but may require additional configurations and optimizations for larger deployments.
Ease of Use: Checkmk offers a user-friendly web interface with intuitive navigation that simplifies the monitoring setup and configuration process. Additionally, it provides various automation features like automatic service recognition and rule-based monitoring, making it easier for administrators to manage monitoring tasks. While Zabbix also offers a user-friendly interface, it may require more effort to configure and set up monitoring compared to Checkmk.
Monitoring Flexibility: Checkmk provides a wide range of monitoring options, including agent-based, agentless, and SNMP-based monitoring. This flexibility allows administrators to choose the most suitable method for their environment. Zabbix, on the other hand, primarily relies on agent-based monitoring, which may require additional efforts for monitoring devices without agents.
Notification System: Checkmk offers a flexible and customizable notification system that allows administrators to configure notification rules based on various criteria. It supports different notification channels like email, SMS, and push notifications, and provides options for escalations and acknowledgments. Zabbix also provides a notification system but may have less flexibility compared to Checkmk in terms of customization options.
Graphing and Reporting: Checkmk offers powerful graphing capabilities with detailed reports on performance trends and historical data. It provides various graphing options and allows for customization of graph views. Zabbix also provides graphing and reporting features but may not offer the same level of customization compared to Checkmk.
Community and Support: Checkmk benefits from a large and active community, which provides extensive documentation, plugins, and community-contributed features. It also offers commercial support options for enterprise users. Zabbix also has a supportive community, but it may not be as extensive as Checkmk's community.
In summary, Checkmk offers scalability, ease of use, monitoring flexibility, a customizable notification system, advanced graphing and reporting capabilities, and a strong community and support network. While Zabbix is also a capable network monitoring solution, it may require additional effort for scalability, setup, and customization compared to Checkmk.
My team is divided on using Centreon or Zabbix for enterprise monitoring and alert automation. Can someone let us know which one is better? There is one more tool called Datadog that we are using for cloud assets. Of course, Datadog presents us with huge bills. So we want to have a comparative study. Suggestions and advice are welcome. Thanks!
I work at Volvo Car Corporation as a consultant Project Manager. We have deployed Zabbix in all of our factories for factory monitoring because after thorough investigation we saw that Zabbix supports the wide variety of Operating Systems, hardware peripherals and devices a Car Manufacturer has.
No other tool had the same amount of support onboard for our production environment and we didn't want to end up using a different tool again for several areas. That is the major strong point about Zabbix and it's free of course. Another strong point is the documentation which is widely available; Zabbix Youtube channel with tutorial video's, Zabbix share which holds free templates, the Zabbix online documentation and the Zabbix forum also helped us out quite a bit. Deployment is quite easy since it uses templates, so almost all configuration can be done on server side.
To conclude, we are really pleased with the tool so far, it helped us detect several causes of issues that were a pain to solve in the past.
Centreon is part of the Nagios ecosystem, meaning there is a huge number of resources you may find around in the community (plugins, skills, addons). Zabbix monitoring paradigms are totally different from Centreon. Centreon plugins have some kind of intelligence when they are launched, where Zabbix monitoring rules are configured centrally with the raw data collected. Testing both will help you understand :) Users used to say Centreon may be faster for setup and deployment. And in the end, both are full of monitoring features. Centreon has out of the box a full catalog of probes from cloud to the edge https://www.centreon.com/en/plugins-pack-list/ As soon as you have defined your monitoring policies and template, you can deploy it fast through command line API or REST API. Centreon plays well in the ITSM, Automation, AIOps spaces with many connectors for Prometheus, ServiceNow, GLPI, Ansible, Chef, Splunk, ... The polling server mode is one of the differentiators with Centreon. You set up remote server(s) and chose btw multiple information-exchange mechanisms. Powerful and resilient for remote, VPN, DMZ, satellite networks. Centreon is a good value for price to do a data collection (availability, performance, fault) on a wide range of technologies (physical, legacy, cloud). There are pro support and enterprise version with dashboards and reporting. IT Central Station gathers many user feedback you can rely on both Centreon & Zabbix https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/centreon-reviews
We highly recommend Zabbix. We have used it to build our own monitoring product (available on cloud -like datadog- or on premise with support) because of its flexibility and extendability. It can be easily integrated with the powerful dashboarding and data aggregation of Grafana, so it is perfect. All configuration is done via web and templates, so it scales well and can be distributed via proxies. I think there also more companies providing consultancy in Zabbix (like ours) than Centreon and community is much wider. Also Zabbix roadmap and focus (compatibility with Elasticsearch, Prometheus, TimescaleDB) is really really good.
Hi Vivek, what's your stack? If huge monitoring bills are your concern and if you’re using a number of JVM languages, or mostly Scala / Akka, and would like “one tool to monitor them all”, Kamon might be the friendliest choice to go for.
Kamon APM’s major benefit is it comes with a built-in dashboard for the most important metrics to monitor, taking the pain of figuring out what to monitor and building your own dashboards for weeks out of the monitoring.
Pros of Checkmk
Pros of Zabbix
- Free21
- Alerts9
- Service/node/network discovery5
- Templates5
- Base metrics from the box4
- Multi-dashboards3
- SMS/Email/Messenger alerts3
- Grafana plugin available2
- Supports Graphs ans screens2
- Support proxies (for monitoring remote branches)2
- Perform website checking (response time, loading, ...)1
- API available for creating own apps1
- Templates free available (Zabbix Share)1
- Works with multiple databases1
- Advanced integrations1
- Supports multiple protocols/agents1
- Complete Logs Report1
- Open source1
- Supports large variety of Operating Systems1
- Supports JMX (Java, Tomcat, Jboss, ...)1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Checkmk
Cons of Zabbix
- The UI is in PHP5
- Puppet module is sluggish2