TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Cisco Intersight vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Cisco Intersight

    Score9.2 out of 10
    N/ACisco 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

    Ansible

    Score9.2 out of 10
    N/AThe Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform (acquired by Red Hat in 2015) is a foundation for building and operating automation across an organization. The platform includes tools needed to implement enterprise-wide automation, and can automate resource provisioning, and IT environments and configuration of systems and devices. It can be used in a CI/CD process to provision the target environment and to then deploy the application on it.

    $5,000

    per year

    Pricing
    Cisco IntersightAnsible
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    Basic Tower
    5,000
    per year
    Enterprise Tower
    10,000
    per year
    Premium Tower
    14,000
    per year
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Cisco IntersightAnsible
    Free Trial
    YesNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Features
    Cisco IntersightAnsible
    Configuration Management
    Comparison of Configuration Management features of Cisco Intersight and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
    Feature
    Cisco Intersight
    -
    Ratings
    Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
    8.6
    44 Ratings
    7% above category average
    Infrastructure Automation00 Ratings9.244 Ratings
    Automated Provisioning00 Ratings8.841 Ratings
    Parallel Execution00 Ratings8.840 Ratings
    Node Management00 Ratings8.432 Ratings
    Reporting & Logging00 Ratings7.841 Ratings
    Version Control00 Ratings8.738 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Cisco IntersightAnsible
    Small Businesses
    Rackspace Fabric
    Score6.3 out of 10
    Salt
    Score6.2 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    IBM Turbonomic
    Score9.3 out of 10
    Perforce Puppet
    Score8.9 out of 10
    Enterprises
    IBM Turbonomic
    Score9.3 out of 10
    AWS Config
    Score7 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Cisco IntersightAnsible
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.0
    (33 ratings)
    9.5
    (108 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    9.1
    (4 ratings)
    8.0
    (3 ratings)
    Usability
    8.2
    (7 ratings)
    7.3
    (1 ratings)
    Performance
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.7
    (5 ratings)
    Support Rating
    9.8
    (32 ratings)
    7.3
    (3 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.2
    (1 ratings)
    Contract Terms and Pricing Model
    8.3
    (4 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Ease of integration
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.6
    (5 ratings)
    Professional Services
    8.4
    (2 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Cisco IntersightAnsible
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Cisco
    It is highly suited for an organisation pushing for a standardised and centralised configuration of settings using policies, profiles and templates. It is highly suited for customers used to legacy UMM that need to refresh their environment, but instead of deploying them in UMM (which is still possible), to take the time and effort to learn Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service and IMM as well as familiarise themselves with the differences between UMM and IMM, and the issues in UMM which IMM addresses and improves upon. We deployed in UMM initially then transitioned to IMM with the transition too. I cannot think of a scenario where Cisco Intersight Infrastructure Service would not be suited. Even for small-scale deployments, it provides significant benefits. Maybe if you come from another server vendor management environment, the learning curve may feel steep (e.g. many new concepts and constructs that one has to master).
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    For automating the configuration of a multi-node, multi-domain (Storage, VM, Container) cluster, Ansible is still the best choice; however, it is not an easy task to achieve. Creating the infrastructure layer, i.e., creating network nodes, VMs, and K8s clusters, still can't be achieved via Ansible. Additionally, error handling remains complex to resolve.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Cisco
    • Intersight can consolidate Infra management on a single dashboard such as UCS Server, Hyperflex, Fabric Interconnect, UCSM.
    • Device policy and configuration can be deployed from Intersight.
    • Firmware and software upgrade for all devices can be done from Intersight.
    • No impact to DC production if Intersight connection is interrupted.
    • Apps workload data is not passed through Intersight, only the control plane.
    • TAC can be opened via Intersight.
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • Debugging is easy, as it tells you exactly within your job where the job failed, even when jumping around several playbooks.
    • Ansible seems to integrate with everything, and the community is big enough that if you are unsure how to approach converting a process into a playbook, you can usually find something similar to what you are trying to do.
    • Security in AAP seems to be pretty straightforward. Easy to organize and identify who has what permissions or can only see the content based on the organization they belong to.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Cisco
    • 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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • I can't think of any right now because I've heard about the Lightspeed and I'm really excited about that. Ansible has been really solid for us. We haven't had any issues. Maybe the upgrade process, but other than that, as coming from a user, it's awesome.
    • Give out Lightspeed for free.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Cisco
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    Even is if it's a great tool, we are looking to renew our licence for our production servers only. The product is very expensive to use, so we might look for a cheaper solution for our non-production servers. One of the solution we are looking, is AWX, free, and similar to AAP. This is be perfect for our non-production servers.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Cisco
    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.)
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    It's overall pretty easy to use foe all the applications I've mentioned before: configuring hosts, installing packages through tools like apt, applying yaml, making changes across wide groups of hosts, etc. Its not a 10 because of the inconveinience of the yaml setup, and the time to write is not worth it for something applied one time to only a few hosts
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Performance
    Cisco
    No answers on this topic
    Red Hat
    Great in almost every way compared to any other configuration management software. The only thing I wish for is python3 support. Other than that, YAML is much improved compared to the Ruby of Chef. The agentless nature is incredibly convenient for managing systems quickly, and if a member of your term has no terminal experience whatsoever they can still use the UI.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Cisco
    I have had servers TAC cases open for issues with Cisco Intersight. Some have yet to be resolved. One case that is still open is where the HCL status ( Hardware Compatibility List ) shows not validated when It should be. We have several servers that have the exact same hardware, OS, and the same firmware. One server will show the HCL is not validated but all others will
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    There is a lot of good documentation that Ansible and Red Hat provide which should help get someone started with making Ansible useful. But once you get to more complicated scenarios, you will benefit from learning from others. I have not used Red Hat support for work with Ansible, but many of the online resources are helpful.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Online Training
    Cisco
    You really need a lab to get hands on but it was useful
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation Rating
    Cisco
    Very smooth process and we did it for 2 data centers
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    I spoke on this topic today!
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Cisco
    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 tool. The way it can update, monitor, and manage our servers is very nice. Overall, we are very happy with it.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    AAP compares favorably with Terraform and Power Automate. I don't have much experience with Terraform, but I find AAP and Ansible easier to use as well as having more capabilities. Power Platform is also an excellent automation tool that is user friendly but I feel that Ansible has more compatibility with a variety of technologies.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Contract Terms and Pricing Model
    Cisco
    Contract terms is similar to other Cisco subscription model, option from 1 year till 5 years. Billing frequency can be monthly, quarterly, annual or prepaid. I think I would not suggest anything regarding contract terms
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Professional Services
    Cisco
    We're not using professional service for Intersight
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    No answers on this topic
    Return on Investment
    Cisco
    • 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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Red Hat
    • POSITIVE: currently used by the IT department and some others, but we want others to use it.
    • NEGATIVE: We need less technical output for the non-technical. It should be controllable or a setting within playbooks. We also need more graphical responses (non-technical).
    • POSITIVE: Always being updated and expanded (CaC, EDA, Policy as Code, execution environments, AI, etc..)
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots

    Cisco Intersight Screenshots

    Screenshot of the Intersight dashboard, which provides out-of-the box summaries of real-time health and performance data across data center and edge infrastructure. Users can customize the dashboard with a library of widgets to quickly see information that's most important to them.Screenshot of the security advisories and field notices that alert users about endpoint devices in their environment that are impacted along with recommended resolution.Screenshot of the Topology Views that let users quickly identify any UCS domain connectivity issues thorugh a visual representation.Screenshot of an example of the automated workflows that users can create, using Intersight's drag-and-drop workflow designer and library of tasks and workflows.Screenshot of an example of the aggregated and visualized metrics that are collected for fabric interconnects, chassis, and servers to monitor devices, optimize performance, identify bottlenecks, and proactively address any potential issues.