Infrastructure monitoring · November 2026 Edition
Zabbix vs Prometheus
Zero of fourteen models named Zabbix first on the direct prompt; zero named Prometheus. Zabbix was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Prometheus by thirteen and Zabbix carries 53 labels and Prometheus 31, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in eight categories this edition.
Named in nine categories this edition.
First-choice share23%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate25%26%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#8A position in a field of 16; printed, not drawn.
Labels5331A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Zabbix reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Datadog was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. Datadog vs Zabbix · Datadog vs Prometheus · Zabbix vs Site24x7
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the infrastructure monitoring page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
ZabbixFirst choices, of fourteen modelsPrometheus
Direct002 against Zabbix · 1 against Prometheus
Paraphrase002 against Zabbix · 1 against Prometheus
Comparative021 against Zabbix
Budget-constrained122
Scale-constrained003 against Zabbix · 3 against Prometheus
Negative005 against Zabbix · 3 against Prometheus
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Zabbix and Prometheus stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | ||
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | ||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | | |
| Mistral Small | | | | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | ||
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | | |
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | ||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | ||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | | |
Zabbix Prometheus first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Zabbix on the left and Prometheus on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Zabbix and Prometheus stood in it.
Neither was the first choice, one was named
6 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Perplexity SonarLogicMonitor alternatives: Better Stack, Datadog, Netdata, Zabbix
Grok 4.20Datadog alternatives: Motadata ObserveOps, New Relic, NinjaOne, Prometheus + Grafana, Site24x7, Zabbix
Mistral SmallDatadog alternatives: Middleware.io, NinjaOne, Zabbix
Qwen 3.7 FlashDatadog alternatives: Checkmk, LogicMonitor, Site24x7, Zabbix
Kimi K2Site24x7 alternatives: Coralogix, Motadata ObserveOps, Paessler PRTG, Zabbix
Muse Glimmer 30BDatadog, New Relic alternatives: LogicMonitor, ManageEngine OpManager, Prometheus + Grafana, Site24x7, Zabbix
Neither was named
8 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5no first choice
GPT-5.4 miniDatadog alternatives: Grafana, New Relic
Gemini 3.5 FlashGrafana alternatives: Better Stack, LogicMonitor, New Relic
DeepSeek V4 FlashLogicMonitor alternatives: New Relic, Paessler PRTG, Site24x7
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
GLM 4.7 FlashXLogicMonitor alternatives: Datadog, New Relic
MiniMax M2.5Site24x7 alternatives: Datadog, LogicMonitor, NinjaOne
GPT-6 LunaDatadog alternatives: Dynatrace, Grafana, New Relic
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Zabbix leads by fifteen points.
Zabbix15%#2 of 16Prometheus0%#13 of 16Mid-marketThe figures above
Enterprise
What the models said about Zabbix
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Five of five in this category shown.
“Zabbix, Nagios, and comparable systems can be effective, but their technical and staffing costs may outweigh free or low license pricing as environments grow.” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Interface can be confusing, jumps between config and viewing; at scale, you need significant tuning, proxy management, and history database optimization.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · negative prompt · soft negative
“starting with Zabbix, Prometheus + Grafana, or Checkmk Community gives you enterprise-grade visibility without any licensing cost” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · first choice
“Zabbix – best all-in-one, no license budget ... It is the most complete free forever platform for full NOC visibility.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“For most small or budget-conscious companies monitoring servers, network devices, and services, I'd start with Zabbix.” GPT-6 Luna · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Prometheus
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of three in this category shown.
“Open-source like Zabbix/Prometheus + Grafana work if you have in-house talent for maintenance, but they add operational burden.” Grok 4.20 · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“Don't expose Prometheus, Alertmanager, exporters, or their metrics and debugging endpoints directly to the public internet.” GPT-6 Luna · negative prompt · soft negative
“Kubernetes & Cloud-Native (Budget Aware) | Prometheus + Grafana | Industry standard, native Kubernetes support, highly customizable.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
Also compared
Datadog vs ZabbixDatadog vs PrometheusZabbix vs Site24x7Zabbix vs LogicMonitorZabbix vs GrafanaZabbix vs New RelicZabbix vs Prometheus + GrafanaSite24x7 vs PrometheusLogicMonitor vs PrometheusGrafana vs PrometheusNew Relic vs PrometheusPrometheus + Grafana vs PrometheusAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full infra monitoring standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.