Chronosphere pits AI against Datadog, touts 85% cost cut, 10× Black Friday load
Paul Nashawaty, principal analyst at CUBE Research, seems to let the numbers do the talking. Chronosphere is putting its AI-driven monitoring platform up against Datadog, promising not only quicker anomaly detection but also explanations you can trace back to the original data source. The tech looks solid, yet many enterprises are still wondering whether it can actually trim budgets without hurting performance.
The startup’s story leans on two high-profile cases: one where spend drops dramatically, another where a traffic spike that would knock out most stacks is handled smoothly. If a data-shaping approach really delivers the savings and stability hinted at in Nashawaty’s comments, the claim shifts from marketing fluff to something you could actually base a decision on. The upcoming quote will show exactly how two customers tested those promises, laying out both the financial impact and how the platform held up under pressure.
Astronomer achieved over 85% cost reduction by shaping data on ingest, and Affirm scaled their load 10x during a Black Friday event with no issues, highlighting the platform's reliability under extreme conditions." The cost argument matters because, as Paul Nashawaty, principal analyst at CUBE Research, noted when Chronosphere launched its Logs 2.0 product in June: "Organizations are drowning in telemetry data, with over 70% of observability spend going toward storing logs that are never queried." For CIOs fatigued by "AI-powered" announcements, Mao acknowledged skepticism is warranted. "The way to cut through it is to test whether the AI shortens incidents, reduces toil, and builds reusable knowledge in your own environment, not in a demo," he advised. He recommended CIOs evaluate three factors: transparency and control (does the system show its reasoning?), coverage of custom telemetry (can it handle non-standardized data?), and manual toil avoided (how many ad-hoc queries and tool-switches are eliminated?). Why Chronosphere partners with five vendors instead of building everything itself Alongside the AI troubleshooting announcement, Chronosphere revealed a new Partner Program integrating five specialized vendors to fill gaps in its platform: Arize for large language model monitoring, Embrace for real user monitoring, Polar Signals for continuous profiling, Checkly for synthetic monitoring, and Rootly for incident management.
Engineers might wonder if they’ll actually trust a system that explains its own choices. Chronosphere claims its AI-Guided Troubleshooting does exactly that, mixing algorithmic analysis with a Temporal Knowledge Graph that keeps mapping an organization’s services in real time. The startup, now valued at $1.6 billion, says the tool is a reaction to the mounting debugging headaches that come as AI speeds up code generation.
Astronomer reports an 85 % cost cut after shaping data on ingest - that sounds impressive, even though the math behind the claim isn’t shared. Likewise, Affirm says it handled ten times its usual Black Friday traffic without a hitch, hinting at scalability, yet we still don’t know the exact traffic patterns. Paul Nashawaty of CUBE Research points out that cost savings often tip the scales toward adoption.
Whether a self-explanatory AI can beat traditional observability stacks remains uncertain, and it’s not yet clear how well the Temporal Knowledge Graph will stay up-to-date in fast-moving environments. The coming rollout should show if the promised reliability survives real-world pressure.
Related Reading
Business & Startups Oracle, NVIDIA deepen tie-up to speed sovereign AI and government digital shift
Business & Startups Skilling programs lag AI; students must prioritize aspiration and depth
Business & Startups EPAM and Cursor partner to scale AI coding for global enterprise customers
Common Questions Answered
How does Chronosphere claim to achieve an 85% cost reduction for Astronomer?
Chronosphere attributes the 85% cost cut to shaping data on ingest, which reduces the volume of telemetry stored and processed. By filtering and normalizing logs early, the platform lowers storage expenses while preserving the data needed for analysis.
What evidence does Chronosphere provide that its platform can handle a 10× load increase during Black Friday?
Chronosphere cites the experience of its customer Affirm, which scaled its monitoring load tenfold during a Black Friday event without performance degradation. This demonstrates the platform's ability to maintain reliability under extreme traffic spikes.
In what ways does Chronosphere's AI‑Guided Troubleshooting differ from traditional monitoring tools like Datadog?
Chronosphere's AI‑Guided Troubleshooting pairs algorithmic anomaly detection with a Temporal Knowledge Graph that maps service relationships, offering explanations traceable to the data source. Unlike Datadog, it aims to provide actionable insights rather than just alerts, reducing debugging complexity.
Why does Paul Nashawaty of CUBE Research emphasize the importance of Chronosphere's Logs 2.0 launch?
Nashawaty highlights that organizations are spending over 70% of observability budgets on log storage, and Logs 2.0 targets this inefficiency by optimizing data handling at ingestion. The launch underscores Chronosphere's focus on cutting costs while improving monitoring performance.