Fix Network With 8 Best Network Monitoring Software I Tried

Hey, is the network acting weird for you, too?

I barely had time to respond before more messages flooded in. File transfers stalled, video calls froze mid-sentence, and even logging into essential apps became impossible. Productivity across the office ground to a stop.

As an employee in one of my earlier jobs, I wasn’t in charge of the network, but I was certainly feeling the pain. Deadlines loomed, and frustration built up as we sat there, unable to do our jobs. IT scrambled to diagnose the issue, but it was all guesswork without the best network monitoring software. Was it a bandwidth hog? A failing switch? A distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack? Nobody knew.

They rebooted routers, ran basic diagnostics, and tried a few quick fixes, but nothing worked. The hours dragged on, clients were left waiting, and urgent work piled up. Hours later, they finally uncovered the culprit: an unnoticed backup process was silently choking the network with excessive traffic. Once identified, it took minutes to resolve, but the damage was already done: lost time, missed deadlines, frustrated employees, and annoyed customers.

That experience stuck with me. I saw firsthand how expensive and disruptive network blind spots can be. Without real-time network monitoring, small issues spiral into business-wide crises. Performance slows without explanation, security threats go undetected, and outages hit at the worst possible moments.

Recently, I tested the best network monitoring software to help others avoid these same headaches. Whether dealing with random slowdowns, unexpected downtime, security threats, or mysterious bandwidth spikes, I’ll help you find the right network monitoring tool in this article. 

IT nightmares? 8 best network monitoring software to end them

Network monitoring software is like having a 24/7 watchtower over a network. It constantly scans, tracks, and analyzes traffic, ensuring everything runs smoothly. Without it, I’d be flying blind, waiting for something to break before realizing there’s a problem. With it, I get real-time visibility into a network’s health to fix issues before they become full-blown outages.

The best network monitoring software collects data and makes sense of it. I’ve seen tools that pinpoint bandwidth hogs, detect security threats, and alert me when something goes wrong. Instead of scrambling to diagnose slow connections or downtime, I get instant insights into where the problem is and how to fix it.

I’ve also learned that not all network monitoring tools are created equal. Some only track basic metrics, while the best ones give me a complete picture, from latency and packet loss to unusual traffic spikes and unauthorized access attempts. The right software helps me prevent them before they impact business operations.

After testing multiple network monitoring solutions, I’ve found that the best tools are fast, reliable, and easy to use. They don’t bury me in complicated logs or require constant babysitting. Instead, they deliver real-time alerts, smart automation, and clear insights that keep a network running smoothly with minimal effort.

How I evaluated the best network monitoring software solutions

Here’s what I considered while testing the best networking monitoring tools.

• Real-time monitoring and alerts: When evaluating network monitoring software, I focus on real-time monitoring and alerts because detecting issues as they happen is crucial. Without real-time visibility, small problems can escalate into costly outages. The best tools provide continuous monitoring and instant alerts via email, SMS, or integrations with platforms like Slack. I look for software that allows me to set custom thresholds for performance metrics like CPU usage, bandwidth consumption, and latency. A strong alerting system ensures I can respond quickly before users or customers notice a problem.
• Protocol and device compatibility: Networks comprise various devices and operating systems, all communicating through different protocols. If a monitoring tool lacks support for key protocols like SNMP, ICMP, or NetFlow, I know it won’t give me full visibility into my infrastructure. I prefer tools tracking performance across routers, switches, servers, cloud environments, and IoT devices. Without this level of compatibility, gaps in monitoring can leave critical issues undetected.
• Bandwidth and traffic analysis: I need software that tracks bandwidth usage and analyzes traffic patterns to identify bottlenecks and unauthorized activity. I can optimize performance and allocate bandwidth where needed by pinpointing which applications or users consume the most resources. Historical data tracking is equally important for forecasting future network capacity needs and avoiding unexpected slowdowns.
• Threat detection and security monitoring: I need a network monitoring tool that can detect anomalies like unusual traffic spikes, unauthorized access attempts, and potential DDoS attacks. Some network monitoring solutions integrate with security platforms, adding an extra layer of protection by detecting and responding to suspicious activity. Without built-in security monitoring, networks are vulnerable to threats that could compromise sensitive data and disrupt operations.
• Cloud and hybrid network support: With more businesses adopting cloud solutions, cloud and hybrid network support has become critical. I look for network monitoring software to track on-premise and cloud-based infrastructures, including AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud. Hybrid networks are increasingly common, so the ability to monitor both physical and virtualized environments from a single dashboard is essential. Virtual private network (VPN) and remote access monitoring are also crucial, especially as remote work becomes more widespread.
• Reporting and data visualization: A network monitoring tool is only as useful as its ability to present data clearly and actionably. Strong reporting and data visualization help me analyze network trends, troubleshoot recurring issues, and justify upgrades to stakeholders. I prefer tools that offer real-time dashboards, historical trend analysis, and customizable reports. The ability to export reports in multiple formats or integrate with third-party analytics tools makes network monitoring even more valuable.

To be included in the network monitoring software category, a product must:

• Continuously track the performance of an entire computer network
• Establish a standard baseline for network performance metrics
• Notify administrators of crashes or deviations from normal performance
• Recommend solutions when performance issues occur
• Offer visual representations of network performance data

*This data was pulled from G2 in 2025. Some reviews may have been edited for clarity.  

1. NinjaOne

One of the biggest advantages I see with NinjaOne is its automatic patch management. Keeping systems updated without manual intervention is a huge plus, especially when managing multiple devices. I don't have to worry about missing security patches or critical updates because the system handles it proactively.

The wide range of remote options available with NinjaOne makes it stand out. Whether I need to troubleshoot a workstation, push updates, or monitor system performance, I have multiple ways to access devices remotely. The ability to connect seamlessly without complex setups or additional tools saves time and effort.

A well-designed dashboard and ticketing system can make a huge difference in daily operations, and NinjaOne delivers in this area. I can track system performance, review alerts, and manage tickets all from a centralized location. This level of visibility helps in prioritizing issues and ensuring that nothing falls through the cracks.

Some monitoring tools can slow down devices, but from what I’ve gathered, NinjaOne seems to have a relatively low system footprint. It’s designed to run in the background without significantly affecting device performance. This is important because no one wants monitoring software that causes lag or disrupts workflow.

One of the recurring issues I’ve noticed with NinjaOne is its alerting system. It doesn’t always provide the level of customization or granularity needed for effective network monitoring. Sometimes, alerts may not trigger at the right time, or they might be too generic to be actionable. If I can’t trust the alerts to provide timely and relevant notifications, it reduces the effectiveness of the software.

Reporting is another area where NinjaOne falls short. While it provides reports, there’s not much flexibility in terms of customizing them to fit specific needs. If I want detailed insights tailored to my business requirements, I might find myself frustrated by the lack of options.

While I find the the dashboard to be generally well-structured, some parts of NinjaOne’s interface can feel unintuitive. Finding specific settings or troubleshooting certain issues may require more clicks than necessary. If a user has to spend extra time hunting down configurations, it slows down workflow efficiency.

As a network monitoring software, NinjaOne could benefit from stronger built-in network analysis features. While it covers essential device monitoring, it doesn’t offer the same depth of network performance insights as some competitors. If I need detailed network traffic analysis, I might have to rely on additional third-party tools.

What I dislike about NinjaOne:

• One of the things that concerns me about NinjaOne is its alerting system. I need alerts that are specific and timely, but from what I’ve seen, they can sometimes be too generic or inconsistent.
• Reporting should be flexible enough to generate insights that align with my specific needs, but NinjaOne doesn’t seem to offer much in terms of customization. If I need detailed, tailored reports, I might have to spend extra time pulling data manually or using external tools.

What G2 users dislike about NinjaOne:

“NinjaOne can be difficult to get off the ground running. While it can be utilized out of the box for most functionality to start with, to really use the tool requires customization. This customization can be difficult at times as it can be a rather large learning curve.

Fortunately there are several avenues for assistance with setup and even assistance after it is up and running. There are engineers available to be scheduled to assist with onboarding issues making this daunting proeces easier. All that being said there are still drawbacks. Implementation can be rough. Figuring out the flow of everything is difficult at first but worth it in the end.”

- NinjaOne Review, Brandon S.

2. Atera

I love Atera’s remote monitoring capability. It provides a solid way to oversee network health without being physically present, which is helpful for IT professionals managing multiple sites. The stability of the remote features means fewer unnecessary trips and quicker troubleshooting. It also helps in proactive maintenance rather than reacting to problems after they escalate. Knowing that I can monitor systems effectively without always being on-site gives me a sense of control. 

The automation tools in Atera help reduce the repetitive work IT teams have to handle. I appreciate how Atera lets you set up routine maintenance tasks like software updates, system health checks, and alerts with minimal intervention. This not only saves time but also reduces the risk of human error. Automating these processes means IT professionals can focus on higher-priority tasks rather than getting bogged down in routine maintenance. 

Atera generally maintains a stable performance, which is crucial for any network monitoring software. A tool that crashes or lags can create bigger problems than it solves, but Atera seems to hold up well under normal conditions. For me, a stable platform means fewer disruptions when resolving issues or monitoring critical systems.

Atera seems to be constantly evolving, with updates that introduce meaningful improvements. A platform that actively listens to feedback and rolls out useful features feels like a tool worth investing in. I feel assured that functionality isn’t stagnant, and future updates might address current limitations. 

The mobile app could use more development to match the functionality of the desktop version. While it does provide some access to monitoring features, it doesn’t feel as responsive or feature-rich as it should be. I’d expect a mobile app to give me full control over critical functions when working remotely, but that’s not always the case with Atera.

While alerts are a core part of any monitoring software, Atera’s notification system sometimes feels excessive. Instead of focusing on the most critical issues, I might receive minor alerts that don’t require immediate attention. This can lead to alert fatigue, where important warnings might be overlooked because of all the noise.

Customer support is important for any software, and Atera’s response times seem inconsistent. I’ve seen some users report quick resolutions while others have faced delays when resolving issues. When dealing with network monitoring, delays in support can mean extended downtime or unresolved technical problems.

What I dislike about Atera:

• While Atera’s mobile app provides some functionality, it doesn’t quite match the capabilities of the desktop version. When working remotely, I expect full control over critical functions, but that’s not always the case here.
• Atera’s notification system tends to send out a flood of alerts, and not all of them are useful. Instead of prioritizing the most critical issues, I sometimes get bombarded with minor notifications that don’t require immediate action. This creates alert fatigue, making it harder to focus on the problems that need attention.

What G2 users dislike about Atera:

“The mobile app could use some love. The account creation and credential assignment could use some automation. It lacks a teams chat integration but I hear that's coming soon. The ticket templates are company-wide, meaning you can't create an onboarding template and only let the HR department access those. Atera could also do well with a Power Automate functionality (e.g. when a ticket is submitted containing password reset or onboarding, reset password based off other attributes or create a user account in M365 tenant respectively.).”

- Atera Review, Verified User in Information Technology and Services

3. Entuity

One of Entuity's strongest points is how it processes and presents network data. Instead of just collecting information, its monitoring algorithm intelligently analyzes network activity to provide actionable insights. This means fewer false alarms and more accurate alerts, and I appreciate how this reduces the time spent chasing down unnecessary notifications.

Instead of relying on periodic checks, it continuously tracks network activity and alerts users immediately when issues arise. I appreciate how this feature can be a lifesaver in large-scale environments where even minor downtime can cause major disruptions. 

Entuity provides a more comprehensive view of network performance than other monitoring tools. It excels at identifying network bottlenecks and performance trends that might not be immediately obvious. I appreciate this level of visibility because it helps me make more informed decisions about resource allocation and infrastructure upgrades.

While Entuity does well in monitoring, I don’t like that it lacks robust network configuration management. Some competitors provide deeper control over network device configurations, allowing for the automation of tasks like firmware updates and policy enforcement. This means users may still need additional tools to handle configuration management efficiently.

Some users feel that Entuity’s understanding of network concepts could be refined further. While it handles basic monitoring well, there are areas where it might not fully capture the nuances of complex network environments. For example, I have seen that it doesn’t support certain advanced protocols and technologies as effectively as competing solutions.

Another drawback is the inability to poll devices from multiple monitoring stations. This device polling limitation is a major challenge in distributed network environments where data must be collected from multiple locations simultaneously. Without this capability, IT teams might need workarounds or additional tools to get a complete picture of their infrastructure.

What I dislike about Entuity:

• I don’t like that Entuity lacks strong network configuration management, so you might still need other tools for tasks like firmware updates.
• I find it frustrating that users can’t poll devices from multiple monitoring stations, making it harder to get a full picture of their network in large environments.

What G2 users dislike about Entuity:

“Simple things, such as being unable to move devices across pollers and filters not staying. When you select something from that filter and return to that view, the filter disappears.”

- Entuity Review, Randy S.

4. LogicMonitor

LogicMonitor automates data collection and simplifies monitoring with metrics across various infrastructure components without requiring extensive manual configuration. This reduces the effort needed to maintain visibility into network performance. I appreciate that this allows teams to focus more on analysis rather than routine monitoring tasks.

Since LogicMonitor is SaaS-based, I don’t have to worry about maintaining on-premise hardware for monitoring. This removes the burden of managing infrastructure just to monitor other infrastructure. A cloud-based setup means the software automatically handles updates and patches, ensuring the latest features and security improvements are always available.

I also find the level of detail in the metrics it collects is impressive. It provides high-level summaries and deep insights into network performance, resource utilization, and potential issues. This kind of granularity is valuable when troubleshooting problems or optimizing network performance.

Setting up LogicMonitor is relatively straightforward compared to some other monitoring tools. The process doesn’t require extensive customization to get it up and running. I value this because lengthy deployments can delay productivity and cause frustration among IT teams.

While the reporting engine works, I’ve noticed that customization options aren’t as flexible as they could be. For a monitoring tool that collects so much data, I expect more control over how reports are generated and displayed.

Frequent UI changes might challenge teams that prefer a stable interface. Updates sometimes require users to reorient themselves to new layouts and workflows, slowing productivity. While improvements are generally welcome, a constantly shifting UI can introduce inefficiencies, especially for teams used to a certain way of working. I think a more gradual approach to UI updates would be beneficial.

While automation is a strong point, I have seen users report how customization seems lacking in certain areas. For organizations with highly specific monitoring needs, being unable to tweak configurations as much as they’d like could be a drawback.

What I dislike about LogicMonitor:

• The reporting engine doesn’t offer enough flexibility for customization. With so much data available, I wish there were better ways to control how reports are generated.
• Frequent UI changes can be frustrating when trying to maintain efficiency. I’d prefer a more stable interface instead of constantly adjusting to new layouts.

What G2 users dislike about LogicMonitor:

“Some of the UIs and tabs could use a visual overhaul.”

- LogicMonitor Review, Brandon H.

5. Dynatrace

Dynatrace offers robust tools for monitoring infrastructure, applications, and networks. It provides detailed insights that help diagnose issues efficiently. With its deep observability, I see how it enables teams to track system health in real-time and proactively address potential failures. It seems particularly useful for complex IT environments where multiple interconnected systems require constant oversight.

I also like its automated issue detection. Instead of manually sifting through logs or relying on guesswork, I can imagine how the artificial intelligence-driven alerting system quickly identifies performance bottlenecks and anomalies. Notifying teams of potential failures before they escalate can significantly reduce the mean time to resolution (MTTR).

I appreciate Dynatrace’s ability to provide detailed infrastructure analytics, offering visibility into the performance of servers, networks, and cloud environments. A clear picture of infrastructure health at any given moment is crucial for optimizing performance and resource allocation. I can see how this helps organizations fine-tune their setups and avoid over-provisioning or underutilizing resources.

When a service outage occurs, restoring functionality quickly is critical. Dynatrace’s detailed diagnostic tools can help teams rapidly locate the root cause of failures. I like how the clear breakdowns of dependencies and failure points significantly reduce troubleshooting time.

While Dynatrace offers extensive capabilities, its sheer volume of tools and options can overwhelm it. The learning curve might be steep for teams new to network monitoring or with limited experience with advanced observability platforms.

I've noticed that some users report weaknesses in Dynatrace’s front-end monitoring and alerting capabilities. This could pose a challenge for organizations that need full-stack observability, including user experience analytics. If frontend performance issues go undetected, users might experience slow load times or glitches without immediate visibility into the root cause. 

Dynatrace reportedly cannot monitor itself, which seems like a notable limitation. I dislike how there’s no built-in way to detect or diagnose its failures if the platform experiences an issue. Self-monitoring can be important in critical network monitoring tools to ensure reliability. Without this capability, teams might rely on alternative methods to track Dynatrace’s performance and availability.

What I dislike about Dynatrace:

• While I recognize Dynatrace's power, the sheer volume of tools can feel overwhelming. The learning curve seems steep, especially for teams without experience in advanced observability platforms.
• I find it concerning that Dynatrace cannot monitor itself. If the platform encounters an issue, there’s no built-in way to detect or diagnose failures internally. For a critical network monitoring tool, this feels like a notable blind spot that could slow down incident response.

What G2 users dislike about Dynatrace:

“I can't monitor Dynatrace with Dynatrace and service status.”

- Dynatrace Review, Jennie T.

6. Azure Service Health

Azure Service Health proactively notifies users about potential or ongoing service issues. Instead of waiting for problems to be discovered through manual troubleshooting, I like how it offers alerts about service disruptions before they become major problems. This means users can take preemptive action, whether rerouting traffic, notifying stakeholders, or preparing contingency plans. The proactive nature of the alerts reduces downtime and increases operational resilience.

Having a customized dashboard means I don’t have to sift through unnecessary details to get the insights I need. Instead of dealing with generic service reports, I can tailor my dashboard to focus only on the specific services and regions that matter to me. This targeted approach improves efficiency because users are not overloaded with irrelevant data. 

Knowing that an issue has occurred is one thing, but understanding why it happened is even more valuable. Azure Service Health provides root cause analysis (RCA) reports, which means users can gain insight into what led to a disruption. Instead of guessing or making assumptions, I like that the software offers a concrete breakdown of the cause, helping them plan better for the future.

Visibility into service health is crucial for organizations that must meet strict compliance requirements. Azure Service Health provides detailed historical data on incidents, which can be essential for audits and compliance reporting. I appreciate how these reports from Azure Service Health help users justify uptime guarantees or explain service disruptions to regulators.

While Azure Service Health provides great insights into Azure’s services, it doesn’t fully replace traditional network monitoring tools. It primarily focuses on Azure’s infrastructure and services rather than providing deep visibility into my internal network performance. If I need to monitor latency, packet loss, or specific internal connectivity issues, I still need a separate monitoring tool. 

While Azure Service Health does provide RCA reports, sometimes the level of detail isn’t sufficient for troubleshooting at a granular level. There are instances where the reports are too high-level, leaving me with unanswered questions about what went wrong. If I’m dealing with a critical issue and the RCA report is vague, I might have to spend extra time investigating independently.

Since Azure Service Health depends on Microsoft’s incident reporting, I am limited to the information they choose to provide. If an issue is still under investigation or Microsoft hasn’t acknowledged it, I may not receive an immediate update. This means users sometimes have to rely on third-party monitoring or social media reports to get a clearer picture of what’s happening.

What I dislike about Azure Service Health:

• I like that it provides root cause analysis, but sometimes, the reports lack the level of detail I need. Users will spend extra time figuring out the real issue if the explanation is too vague.
• Since Azure Service Health depends on Microsoft’s updates, I don’t always get immediate information on emerging issues. If Microsoft delays acknowledging a problem, users might have to look elsewhere for details.

What G2 users dislike about Azure Service Health:

“Dependence on Microsoft means there are some issues we cannot intervene in or prevent. It mainly acts as a communication medium for Microsoft-related service outages. Latency issues cannot be monitored or notified by Azure Service Health. We need an additional tool to track those issues externally.”

- Azure Service Health Review, Murugesh P.

7. ManageEngine OpManager

I appreciate ManageEngine OpManager’s ability to provide a holistic view of an entire network infrastructure. I can see detailed metrics for servers, routers, switches, and applications in one place. This level of visibility makes it easier to pinpoint performance bottlenecks before they become full-blown failures. 

ManageEngine OpManager provides immediate updates so I can respond to potential issues. This means users can detect sudden spikes in bandwidth usage, CPU overloads, or failing network devices before they cause significant downtime. The dashboards and alerts are designed to keep you proactive rather than reactive, which is critical in environments where even a few minutes of network failure can have serious consequences. 

Troubleshooting network issues can be frustrating, but ManageEngine OpManager provides tools that make the process easier. For example, I can analyze historical performance trends to identify patterns that might indicate a recurring issue. Another standout feature is the ability to simulate potential network failures and analyze their impact before they occur.

ManageEngine OpManager tracks resource consumption so I can optimize how bandwidth, CPU, and memory are allocated. If certain devices use more resources than they should, users can take corrective action before it impacts the rest of the network. This proactive approach helps reduce unnecessary expenses, as users can identify whether they need an upgrade or can optimize an existing setup.

While ManageEngine OpManager offers a range of customization options, deeper customizations often require scripting. If I want to tailor the software to meet specific needs, I’d have to write custom scripts, which might not be feasible for someone without coding experience. This can be frustrating because I expect a high-end network monitoring tool to offer more out-of-the-box customization without requiring technical workarounds.

While ManageEngine OpManager is designed for scalability, some users report that it can slow down under very heavy workloads. If a network has thousands of devices generating large amounts of data, performance can suffer, leading to delays in alerts and reporting. This can be concerning because speed and responsiveness are critical in a monitoring solution. I wouldn’t want to rely on a system that lags most when I need real-time insights.

While ManageEngine OpManager does offer reporting features, I’ve noticed that the selection of built-in report templates is somewhat limited. If I need specific reports that aren’t available by default, I either have to create custom ones (which isn’t always intuitive) or look for third-party solutions.

What I dislike about ManageEngine OpManager:

• While ManageEngine OpManager offers many customization options, I’ve found that deeper customizations often require scripting. If I want to tailor the software to meet highly specific monitoring needs, I’d have to write custom scripts, which isn’t always feasible.
• Although ManageEngine OpManager is built for scalability, I’ve seen reports that performance can slow down under heavy workloads. If a network consists of thousands of devices generating large amounts of data, the software may start experiencing delays in alerts and reporting.

What G2 users dislike about ManageEngine OpManager:

“The pre-loaded device templates in the tool are very basic. ManageEngine should invest more in providing ready-to-use templates with the correct data since vendors expose all necessary information through their MIBs.

Additionally, the ability to create templates via REST APIs is currently nonexistent, even though many vendors are shifting toward APIs as the primary method for data collection. We have to develop these templates from scratch using custom scripts, which adds unnecessary complexity.”

- ManageEngine OpManager Review, Verified User in Information Technology and Services

8. Site24x7

I like how Site24x7 tracks endpoint events step by step. This level of granularity is invaluable when diagnosing network issues or pinpointing performance bottlenecks. Unlike other monitoring tools that provide only a high-level overview, Site24x7 allows me to see exactly where delays occur. This feature helps users troubleshoot complex network environments with multiple dependencies. 

Managing multiple resources across a complex network can be overwhelming, but Site24x7 consolidates this into a single platform. I wouldn’t have to jump between different tools to monitor servers, applications, and network devices. Instead of having fragmented visibility, everything is centralized, which can improve response times when an issue arises.

I appreciate that Site24x7 offers a broader spectrum of monitoring services, including application and server performance. An all-in-one solution means I wouldn’t need additional software to monitor different IT infrastructure aspects. This is particularly useful when managing large-scale IT environments where different components must work seamlessly.

Site24x7 seems to be actively improving its features. The frequent updates suggest that the developers address customer feedback and stay on top of emerging monitoring needs. I wouldn’t want to invest in a tool that becomes stagnant and fails to keep up with new technologies. Regular enhancements also mean the software remains competitive with other network monitoring solutions.

Regular updates are usually good, but not when they introduce new issues. Some users have noted that Site24x7 has had problems where updates caused disruptions in performance or functionality. That’s a major concern because I wouldn’t want to rely on a monitoring tool that becomes unstable due to its updates.

While Site24x7 offers a broad range of features, some more advanced capabilities seem locked behind higher-tier plans. That means I might have to pay significantly more to access features that should be standard for network monitoring. The frustration is that while the core features may be useful, I’d have to evaluate whether the additional cost is justifiable.

Some feedback suggests that Site24x7’s alerting system isn’t always as effective as it should be. If alerts are too frequent, they can become noise, causing users to ignore them. On the other hand, if alerts aren’t timely or well-prioritized, they can fail to catch critical issues before they escalate. I’d expect a monitoring tool to offer a refined balance between actionable alerts and unnecessary notifications.

What I dislike about Site24x7:

• Frequent updates are usually good, but I’ve seen feedback that Site24x7’s updates sometimes cause system disruptions. I wouldn’t want to rely on a monitoring tool that becomes unstable because of its updates.
• While Site24x7 offers many useful features, I don’t like that some advanced capabilities are locked behind higher-tier pricing plans. It’s frustrating to have to pay extra for features that feel essential for network monitoring.

What G2 users dislike about Site24x7:

“There seem to be a few bugs that occasionally add extra monitors. These issues are addressed quickly, but they are still concerning when working with a limited number of monitors. Maxing out unexpectedly means I have to manually delete them or remove the base monitor and start over. It’s not a dealbreaker, but it can be frustrating.”

- Site24x7 Review, Daniel M.

Best network monitoring software: Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

1. What network monitoring tools have you found to be the best?

Based on my research, NinjaOne, Atera, and Entuity are the best construction accounting software solutions.

2. What is the best cloud infrastructure monitoring software?

Datadog, Dynatrace, and LogicMonitor are the best cloud infrastructure monitoring software solutions.

3. What are the four categories of network monitoring?

The four categories of network monitoring are fault monitoring, performance monitoring, accounting monitoring, and security monitoring. Fault monitoring detects and resolves network issues, while performance monitoring tracks speed, uptime, and efficiency. Accounting monitoring manages resource usage, and security monitoring detects threats and vulnerabilities.

4. How do you monitor all computers on a network?

To monitor all computers on a network, use network monitoring software like Site24x7, PRTG, or Nagios to track performance, security, and connectivity. Deploy agents or agentless monitoring to collect real-time CPU usage, bandwidth, and system health data. Set up alerts and dashboards for proactive issue detection and troubleshooting.

5. What is the most reliable method of detecting network issues?

The most reliable way to detect network issues is through real-time monitoring with automated alerts. Tools like SNMP, NetFlow, and packet sniffers help track traffic, performance, and security anomalies. AI-driven anomaly detection can further enhance issue identification.

Shut down blind spots before they shut down your network

Network issues bring work to a halt, create security risks, and leave everyone frustrated. 

I’ve seen firsthand how a single blind spot can cause hours of downtime, missed deadlines, and lost productivity. Without the right network monitoring software, IT teams are left scrambling to figure out what’s wrong instead of fixing problems before they escalate. A good monitoring tool gives you real-time visibility, alerts you to issues before they get out of hand, and helps keep everything running smoothly.

When picking the right network security monitoring software, consider what matters most for your setup. Do you need real-time alerts, security monitoring, or advanced traffic analysis? Ensure the tool can scale with your network, is easy to use, and provides the level of detail you need to troubleshoot quickly. The right choice can mean the difference between a minor hiccup and a full-blown network disaster.

Wish to monitor servers, applications, networks, databases, and more? Try the best enterprise monitoring software.