We recently had some experience with AWS Application Load Balancer, and I cay for sure it's not match for Kemp Loadmaster. Rules options are limited; configuration options are not really flexible; and learning curve is much steeper.
We use Citrix ADC's in our main office to load balance hundreds of items. This was overkill for a remote office. Kemp's Loadmaster was a great fit for the use case, at a fraction of the price.
Verified User
Engineer
Chose Kemp LoadMaster
F5 [BIG-IP] has more features, but for our requirements, Kemp [LoadMaster] had all the features we needed and was a significantly more economical option.
Verified User
Administrator
Chose Kemp LoadMaster
[Kemp LoadMaster is more] stable and [has] better pricing.
Verified User
Engineer
Chose Kemp LoadMaster
Setup is easier and more straight forward on the Kemp. While I am a technical person and can setup HAProxy for the client's needs, it would be difficult for the client to manage the configuration themselves.
Kemp LoadMaster is a much more reliable technology compared to its competitors. The ease of use and convenience to have it set up is one of the primary reasons to have it we choose Kemp LoadMaster over their competitors. Besides the support that we get from them is also very …
We have conducted random evaluations of other product comparison data against Kemp [LoadMaster], and are very satisfied with the [Kemp] Loadmaster product reviews. We feel strongly about the product reliability, support model, and ease of use. We have complete confidence when …
LoadMaster is a bit more professional and enterprise grade than a simple open source tool that is free of charge like HAProxy. LoadMaster fares better in Windows application environments than HAProxy, and the configuration of LoadMaster is done in a more modern way through an …
Price and ease of use are much better than Citrix ADC. The CPU and memory utilization is lower and the licensing is much better.
Verified User
Manager
Chose Kemp LoadMaster
We only used MS TMG server in past. The product is discontinued and out of support. It was our consultant who recommended Kemp to us. We trusted his suggestion and we don't regret it.
Specialized product for the purpose, better support on the first call (no wait for the second level till you found the solution on your own). In addition, we wanted to separate these services from the firewalls, so the firewall can do its job better. Last but not least, none of …
Although we use the two LBs in vastly different roles, the Kemp's architecture and interfaces are generally much easier and intuitive than the Netscaler's. Hardware/sw/fw upgrades and hardware migrations of the Kemps are much easier and straightforward. The Netscaler does …
Kemp LoadMaster is easier to implement and operate, all while being less expensive. Although some competitors offer more functionality, most of our customers don't need it.
The Kemp LoadMaster outshined both of our other evaluated products, mainly in speed of setup, features available, and overall cost of ownership. In the case of the Azure LB it wasn't going to work well for our on Premise servers. The Barracuda was unreliable and difficult to …
Loadmaster is very powerful and flexible load balancer. Variety of options allows to create a complex network of rules and routes. During our website rollout Loadmaster allowed us to run multiple generations of the website simultaneously and seamlessly by doing the content switching on the fly. Powerful API allows easy integration into any development lifecycle.
Where the LoadBalancer excels is the multiple levels at which you can load balance servers. We currently use layer 7 LB, but others are available as well.
I particularly like the ability for the LB to know when servers are down, and if all are offline then you can create a redirect to a static HTML page or some other destination that is more informative.
The ease in which a service can be created and deployed using already pre-canned templates makes it a very convenient setup process.
Kemp makes it very easy to setup, configure and manage the LoadMaster without needing a lot of help from their engineers. The interface is very easy to understand and intuitive to use. We like how it is not complicated - I can easily have one of my techs login and they can figure out how to setup/configure virtual services for load balancing without needing a manual or tech support.
Support has been easy to deal with; I have only need[ed] to contact them a few times during setup. Once its been in place and operational, we have not need[ed] to mess with the system [which] is a huge advantage. I like system[s] that do not break and require constant attention in a production environment.
We chose Kemp LoadMaster because it is 1/10 the price of the competition and MUCH easier to deploy and configure and WORKS. We have had ZERO issues with the product since installation. Their engineers and their sales team have both reached out post-install to check in and see if everything is working as expected.
We used Kemp LoadMaster for many projects. For a lot of customers, load balancers were too expensive or too complicated before we introduced Kemp products.
It's not a overly complicated product, so we were able to train many engineers on it and have them get a certification.