
GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Data Science AnalyticsTop 10 Best Gpu Monitoring Software of 2026
Compare 10 gpu monitoring software tools with rankings and key features, including Datadog, Dynatrace, Prometheus, Aida64, and New Relic.
How we ranked these tools
Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.
Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.
AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.
Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.
Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
For local, high-fidelity GPU sensor visibility when you’re tuning and validating, Aida64 is the clear pick, whereas New Relic fits teams already running it who want GPU incidents tied to traces and releases, and if you want a host-local option without a pipeline, Open Hardware Monitor is the budget-friendly alternative.
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
Aida64
Aida64 links GPU sensor charts with full system inventory so troubleshooting stays in one workflow.
Built for fits when engineers need local, high-fidelity GPU sensor visibility for tuning and validation..
New Relic
Editor pickService-level incident workflows that correlate GPU health signals with distributed traces and deployment events.
Built for fits when teams already use New Relic and need GPU incidents mapped to traces and releases..
Open Hardware Monitor
Editor pickHost-local GPU sensor polling with configurable export, without requiring a specialized GPU telemetry agent.
Built for fits when a small lab needs host-local GPU sensor visibility without building a telemetry pipeline..
Related reading
Comparison Table
Aida64
specialistSystem diagnostic and benchmarking tool with GPU sensor monitoring.
Aida64 links GPU sensor charts with full system inventory so troubleshooting stays in one workflow.
Aida64’s monitoring loop is designed around frequent local polling of device sensors and it renders time-series graphs for GPU temperature, load, and related readings. Hardware inventory and stability-oriented reporting sit alongside the monitoring screens, which reduces the need to cross-reference separate tools during incident triage. The GPU telemetry view is most effective when the same host is being investigated, because the app’s data is oriented around the local machine’s sensor access.
A key tradeoff is that Aida64 is not positioned as a central monitoring system with standardized ingestion, so building multi-host dashboards and alert routing typically requires additional infrastructure. It fits situations where an engineer needs repeatable local visibility into GPU thermals and utilization during tuning, driver validation, or workstation hardware checks.
- +Local GPU sensor charts and telemetry refresh are fast and easy to interpret
- +Hardware inventory and sensor monitoring use the same system context
- +Stable set of GPU readings supports quick tuning and driver comparisons
- +Focused desktop workflow suits workstation debugging without extra services
- –Remote, multi-host aggregation and fleet dashboards require external tooling
- –Automation and API access are not the primary integration path
- –Container or hypervisor-integrated visibility is limited compared with agent stacks
- –Alert routing and policy management are less complete than telemetry platforms
GPU performance engineers
Validate clocks and thermals under load
Faster tuning iteration cycles
IT hardware support teams
Triage workstation GPU issues
Reduced mean time to identify
Show 2 more scenarios
Data science labs
Check stability before training runs
Fewer failed training sessions
Monitor GPU sensor behavior during a short workload to catch thermal or power limits early.
Overclocking enthusiasts
Compare changes across sessions
Safer performance tuning decisions
Review GPU temperature and fan behavior trends after clock or voltage profile adjustments.
Best for: Fits when engineers need local, high-fidelity GPU sensor visibility for tuning and validation.
More related reading
New Relic
enterpriseObservability platform supporting NVIDIA GPU metrics through infrastructure agent.
Service-level incident workflows that correlate GPU health signals with distributed traces and deployment events.
New Relic’s GPU monitoring posture centers on collecting GPU metrics via agents or integrations, then correlating those metrics with application telemetry like distributed traces and service health. GPU metrics can be visualized in dashboards and used in alert conditions that reference the same entity model as services and hosts. This correlation workflow fits teams that treat GPU issues as part of end-to-end performance management instead of a standalone hardware dashboard.
A tradeoff appears when GPU telemetry needs very specific signals such as per-stream kernel attribution or fine-grained driver and bus-level visibility. New Relic fits best when a team already runs New Relic for services and wants GPU metrics correlated to workload behavior and deployment timelines. It is less ideal for environments that require only Prometheus-style exporters and Grafana panels without adopting New Relic’s entity and alerting model.
- +Cross-link GPU metrics with traces, logs, and service entities
- +Centralized alert conditions that reference deployment and service context
- +Dashboards support consistent navigation across infra and application telemetry
- +Extensible ingestion paths via agents and integration connectors
- –Deep driver-level GPU instrumentation is not the primary focus
- –High-cardinality GPU labels can increase operational overhead
- –Exporter-only workflows may feel constrained by entity modeling
- –Custom GPU metric pipelines require careful instrumentation hygiene
SRE and platform engineers
Triage GPU-induced latency spikes
Faster root-cause confirmation
ML platform owners
Track workload regressions after rollout
Quicker rollback decisions
Show 1 more scenario
Observability teams
Standardize GPU monitoring across fleets
Fewer duplicated dashboards
Centralize GPU metric dashboards and alerts using the same entity context as other telemetry.
Best for: Fits when teams already use New Relic and need GPU incidents mapped to traces and releases.
Open Hardware Monitor
specialistFree open-source tool monitoring CPU and GPU temperatures and voltages.
Host-local GPU sensor polling with configurable export, without requiring a specialized GPU telemetry agent.
Open Hardware Monitor polls GPU-related sensors on the machine and presents a live view for thermal behavior, power draw, and frequency changes. Support for features like junction-style readings and VRAM utilization depends on whether the GPU and driver expose those fields through standard sensor interfaces. Export options enable integration into external dashboards and workflows, which helps teams avoid rebuilding sensor collection logic. This makes it a good fit for workstation validation, driver changes, and thermal troubleshooting.
A key tradeoff is that Open Hardware Monitor does not provide a comprehensive multi-tenant governance model like RBAC, audit logs, and fleet-wide policy enforcement. It also lacks native process-level GPU attribution because it centers on device sensors rather than per-process telemetry from the runtime. It fits usage situations where one system or a small set of machines needs immediate GPU sensor visibility during tuning or incident response.
- +Local sensor polling gives fast GPU thermals and clocks visibility
- +Configurable sensor export supports custom monitoring integration
- +Useful for driver and cooling validation on single hosts
- +Works without a separate DCGM-compatible agent footprint
- –Sensor coverage depends on GPU and driver-exposed telemetry fields
- –No process-level attribution for GPU usage by running workloads
- –Limited multi-host governance and fleet controls
Hardware validation engineers
Tune fan curves during stress tests
Faster thermal tuning cycles
IT teams for workstation fleets
Verify GPU stability after driver updates
Reduced rollback risk
Show 2 more scenarios
Lab operators
Monitor GPU thermals during experiments
Earlier throttling detection
Continuously view device temperatures and frequency shifts during long runs.
Performance analysts
Correlate power and clocks during benchmarks
Clearer performance bottleneck signals
Compare frequency and power draw patterns across benchmark phases on a host.
Best for: Fits when a small lab needs host-local GPU sensor visibility without building a telemetry pipeline.
Weights & Biases
vertical specialistTracks GPU utilization, memory, temperature, power, and training system metrics alongside machine learning runs.
Run context linking that ties GPU telemetry to experiment metadata through the same workflow and API surface.
Weights & Biases is tailored for GPU observability around ML training and experimentation runs, with a run-scoped view that links hardware telemetry to code context. The solution supports GPU metrics collection and experiment logging so operators can correlate GPU utilization trends with training throughput and job phases.
It also provides automation hooks and APIs to pipe telemetry and job metadata into a consistent workflow, which matters for fleet-level repeatability. Governance features cover team access controls and auditability, which helps keep shared dashboards aligned across multiple projects.
- +Run-scoped GPU charts connect utilization changes to specific training experiments
- +Automation via API supports repeatable telemetry ingestion and metadata enrichment
- +Team access controls help manage shared dashboards across ML projects
- +Extensibility fits custom training telemetry beyond baseline GPU counters
- –GPU-only monitoring is less comprehensive than agent-first infrastructure monitoring stacks
- –Depth of low-level GPU signals depends on enabled collectors and runtime integration
- –High-cardinality process attribution can require careful instrumentation discipline
- –Operationalizing multi-cluster rollups takes extra integration work
Best for: Fits when ML teams need run-linked GPU telemetry and experiment-aware automation, not just host-level metrics.
ClearML
vertical specialistCaptures GPU utilization, memory, temperature, and workload metrics across machine learning experiments.
Run-centric GPU telemetry correlation that maps device metrics back to ML experiment identifiers for timeline debugging.
ClearML collects and visualizes GPU telemetry for ML training and inference jobs to support workload-level debugging. It correlates GPU metrics like utilization, memory use, and temperature with the originating training run through ML-focused identifiers.
It also provides integrations and exports that fit into existing monitoring stacks, including dashboards and alerting workflows. ClearML’s differentiation is the run-centric view that ties GPU behavior to experiment context rather than treating GPUs as generic infrastructure endpoints.
- +Run-linked GPU timelines make it easier to debug training regressions
- +Job-aware process attribution reduces guesswork during capacity planning
- +Dashboard views keep VRAM and thermal signals in the same analysis context
- +Export and integration paths support embedding GPU telemetry into existing tooling
- –Deeper automation depends on integrating instrumentation into the ML workflow
- –Coverage is weaker for non-training GPU roles like system-wide batch inference pools
- –High-cardinality job labeling can strain performance during large-scale experiments
- –Cross-cluster normalization requires careful alignment of identifiers
Best for: Fits when ML teams need run-scoped GPU telemetry to debug training behavior and tie alerts to experiments.
Checkmk
SMBMonitors GPU hardware and related host metrics through an extensible infrastructure monitoring platform.
Config-driven service discovery and check rules let GPU telemetry become first-class services without custom dashboards.
Checkmk is a monitoring system that uses a modular agent and plugin model to turn host telemetry into actionable service states. For GPU monitoring, it can collect driver and hardware metrics through local agents and remote integrations, then map them to thresholds for VRAM utilization tracking and thermal throttling alerts.
Automation features like discovery rules and event handling reduce manual wiring when GPU fleets and hosts change. Governance support centers on role-based access, audit-relevant configuration changes, and controlled alert delivery.
- +Modular agent and plugin structure makes GPU metric collection adaptable
- +Service-state modeling supports alert logic tied to specific GPU conditions
- +Discovery and automation reduce repetitive setup across changing host pools
- +RBAC and change visibility support multi-admin operations
- –GPU-specific coverage depends on the right checks and metric sources
- –Tuning polling interval and alert thresholds can take iterative governance work
- –Higher-cardinality GPU metrics can increase storage and query overhead
- –Complex containerized GPU passthrough scenarios may require custom collection
Best for: Fits when teams need configurable GPU telemetry collection and service-based alerting for mixed host environments.
LogicMonitor
enterpriseProvides infrastructure monitoring for GPU-equipped servers and data center systems.
API-driven configuration and workflow automation for GPU alerting tied to discovered infrastructure inventory.
LogicMonitor pairs GPU-aware telemetry collection with broad infrastructure discovery, letting GPU signals land alongside servers, networks, and storage in one monitoring model. Its automation layer supports alert logic, event workflows, and API-driven configuration, which helps standardize GPU alerting across fleets.
LogicMonitor can target GPU metrics such as utilization, temperatures, and fan behavior through its agent-based data collection, then route findings into dashboards and alerting rules. The result is end-to-end visibility for GPU capacity and failure signals tied to the same operational context as the rest of the environment.
- +API automation supports repeatable GPU monitoring configuration at scale
- +Agent-first collection makes GPU metrics consistent across diverse hosts
- +Discovery and mapping lets GPU telemetry correlate with infrastructure context
- +Flexible alert rules and event workflows cover thermal and utilization thresholds
- –GPU coverage depends on supported collector paths and host setup choices
- –High-cardinality GPU attribution can increase dashboard and query complexity
- –Cross-team governance requires deliberate RBAC and workflow standards
- –Deep container and vGPU visibility can require additional operational wiring
Best for: Fits when large operations teams need GPU telemetry aligned with enterprise infrastructure workflows and automation.
Splunk Observability Cloud
enterpriseCollects GPU infrastructure metrics and presents them within infrastructure observability workflows.
GPU-aware correlation in alert incidents that ties utilization and memory signals to the associated workload timeline.
Splunk Observability Cloud maps infrastructure, logs, and application telemetry into a single operations workflow, with GPU signals treated as first-class context for incident triage. GPU monitoring coverage focuses on utilization, memory, and process visibility tied to the workload timeline, so dashboards can correlate GPU activity with service behavior.
Alerting supports threshold and anomaly-style policies, and it is integrated into Splunk’s alert routing and ticketing ecosystem. GPU data ingestion is built to handle high telemetry throughput from distributed collectors and to keep query performance usable during active incidents.
- +Correlation across GPU metrics, logs, and traces for incident timelines
- +Strong Splunk alert routing with workflow handoff for on-call
- +Process-level GPU attribution to connect jobs to metrics quickly
- +Collector and pipeline design supports higher telemetry throughput during bursts
- –GPU metric depth depends on which agent and collectors are deployed
- –Custom dashboards can become complex across multiple GPU topologies
- –Some GPU health signals require additional configuration beyond default views
- –RBAC and audit behaviors vary by integration surface and deployment shape
Best for: Fits when teams already standardize on Splunk telemetry workflows and need GPU metrics inside incident automation.
ManageEngine OpManager
SMBMonitors server hardware, operating system metrics, and GPU-related performance indicators.
Device and host inventory mapping places GPU status into OpManager’s existing alert, topology, and reporting model.
ManageEngine OpManager polls network devices and servers to surface GPU health signals like utilization, temperature, and fault states within the same operations view. It ties telemetry collection to inventory-led asset mapping so GPU metrics land on the correct host ports and device objects.
OpManager also supports alerting workflows and reporting that combine GPU status with broader infrastructure reachability and performance context. For GPU monitoring specifically, the value hinges on how well the environment can expose GPU metrics through supported discovery and agent collection paths.
- +Inventory-led asset mapping keeps GPU metrics aligned to host identities
- +Network operations views combine GPU health with device availability and links
- +Alerting workflows connect GPU thresholds to operational escalation
- +Centralized reporting groups GPU metrics with wider infrastructure telemetry
- –GPU coverage depends on how well GPU metrics can be collected in the environment
- –Less direct support for process-level GPU attribution than agent-centric stacks
- –Limited native extensibility compared with exporters and metric pipelines
- –High-frequency telemetry polling can increase monitoring load in large estates
Best for: Fits when operations teams want GPU health inside an existing network and server monitoring workflow.
Comet
vertical specialistRecords GPU system metrics with experiment metadata for machine learning development and comparison.
Workload-correlated alerting that maps GPU telemetry to the active task for faster triage.
Comet is a GPU monitoring solution built around event and alerting workflows for teams running production ML and inference systems. It focuses on collecting GPU telemetry, correlating it with workloads, and turning signals into actionable notifications. Comet’s monitoring loop supports automation via integrations and an API surface for pulling metrics and wiring alert logic into existing operations tooling.
- +API-first automation supports custom alert routing and metric pulls
- +Correlates GPU signals to active workloads instead of raw device counters
- +Alert workflows reduce time-to-action for thermal and utilization issues
- +Integration options fit common operations stacks without manual dashboards
- –Limited depth for low-level GPU forensics compared with kernel-level tooling
- –Multi-environment rollouts require careful agent placement planning
- –Less suitable for deep Prometheus-style retention and long-range analytics
- –Process attribution depends on consistent workload visibility
Best for: Fits when teams need workload-correlated GPU alerts with API-driven automation for production ML.
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 data science analytics, Aida64 stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
How to Choose the Right gpu monitoring software
GPU monitoring software collects VRAM utilization, thermal behavior, and clock and power signals and then turns them into alerts, dashboards, and triage timelines across single hosts or fleets. This guide covers Aida64, New Relic, Dynatrace, Prometheus, and the other tools in the Top 10 list to show how each product approaches collection depth and operational workflows.
The standout differences show up in how tools link GPU health to context like system inventory, service entities, or experiment runs. Aida64 anchors GPU sensor charts to full system inventory for one-machine troubleshooting, while New Relic focuses incident workflows that correlate GPU health with distributed traces and deployment events.
GPU monitoring software that turns GPU sensor signals into alerts, dashboards, and workload context
GPU monitoring software polls or ingests GPU telemetry from device sensors and drivers, then normalizes it into usable monitoring signals like utilization, thermals, and device health for visualization and alerting. Tools can stay host-local, use exporters, or integrate with broader observability pipelines that already carry logs and traces.
Aida64 emphasizes local GPU sensor polling and fast chart interpretation tied to the same system context via hardware inventory mapping. New Relic emphasizes correlating GPU health signals with distributed traces and deployment events so GPU incidents align with service changes and on-call workflows.
GPU telemetry context, automation, and aggregation controls
GPU monitoring software is judged by how it turns device signals into decisions, not by whether charts exist. Correlation speed and operational traceability depend on how each tool links GPU health to a stable context like inventory, service entities, or run metadata.
Inventory-linked troubleshooting vs distributed incident workflows
Aida64 links GPU sensor charts with the same system inventory so a single host session covers both identity and thermals. New Relic maps GPU health signals into service entities and distributed traces so GPU incidents align with deployment and release context.
Run-scoped correlation for ML experiments
Weights & Biases connects run-scoped GPU charts to experiment metadata through its workflow and API surface. ClearML ties device metrics back to ML experiment identifiers on a training timeline so debugging stays anchored to the job that caused the change.
Automation and API-driven configuration at fleet scale
LogicMonitor uses API-driven configuration and workflow automation to align GPU telemetry alerting with discovered infrastructure inventory. Comet provides API-first automation that correlates GPU signals to the active workload for production ML triage.
Host-local telemetry collection without agent-first deployment
Open Hardware Monitor performs host-local GPU sensor polling and exports sensors without requiring a specialized GPU telemetry agent. Aida64 also uses local sensor polling but adds full hardware inventory mapping into the same view for troubleshooting context.
Service discovery and check-rule modeling for alerting
Checkmk turns GPU telemetry into first-class services using config-driven service discovery and check rules. ManageEngine OpManager maps GPU status into its existing inventory, topology, and alert model so GPU health shows inside the same device reporting footprint.
Choose GPU monitoring by deployment philosophy and correlation scope
A correct selection starts with a correlation target. Tools that link GPU health to system inventory or ML run metadata optimize triage for a narrow question, while distributed observability platforms optimize cross-system incident workflows.
Pick the context object that must appear in the incident or chart
If the workflow needs one-machine debugging with hardware identity, Aida64 links charts to system inventory so engineers can correlate thermals and clocks to the exact device. If the workflow needs release-aligned incidents, New Relic correlates GPU health with distributed traces and deployment events so on-call triage points to service changes.
Decide whether telemetry must be run-linked for ML debugging
If training regressions require a run timeline that ties utilization shifts to experiment context, use Weights & Biases because it connects GPU telemetry to experiment metadata through the same workflow and API surface. If run-linked timeline debugging is also required but job-aware attribution is the priority, ClearML maps GPU device metrics back to ML experiment identifiers for timeline debugging.
Select an automation model based on how monitoring gets provisioned
If GPU alerting configuration must be repeatable across infrastructure inventory, use LogicMonitor because API automation aligns GPU monitoring configuration with discovered assets. If the team needs custom alert routing and metric pulls tied directly to active production tasks, Comet’s API-first automation focuses on workload-correlated alerting.
Choose between agent-first fleet consistency and host-local sensor polling
If the requirement is fast local thermals and clock visibility without building a telemetry pipeline, use Open Hardware Monitor because it provides host-local GPU sensor polling with configurable sensor export. If the workflow also needs hardware inventory and sensor monitoring in the same local session, Aida64 keeps troubleshooting inside one system context.
Model alerts as services or as incident timelines
If the operation wants configurable service discovery and check rules that convert GPU telemetry into first-class services, use Checkmk because it uses config-driven service discovery and GPU-aware check rules. If the team wants GPU incidents tied to on-call workflows and cross-signal timelines, Splunk Observability Cloud provides GPU-aware correlation in alert incidents that ties utilization and memory signals to the associated workload timeline.
Who GPU monitoring buyers should match to tool strengths
Teams buy GPU monitoring to reduce mean time to understand thermal throttling, memory pressure, and performance drops. The right fit depends on whether the team needs host-local forensics, distributed incident correlation, or run-linked ML debugging.
Single-host troubleshooting engineers
Aida64 fits engineers who need fast interpretation of local GPU sensor charts with the same hardware inventory context so identity and telemetry are in one workflow.
Platform and SRE teams running distributed observability
New Relic fits operations teams that want GPU health mapped to distributed traces and deployment events so GPU incidents align with service releases and trace timelines.
ML training teams tracking run regressions
Weights & Biases fits teams that require run-scoped GPU telemetry linked to experiment metadata through the same workflow and API surface for repeatable ingestion and enrichment.
Operations teams standardizing alerting across many hosts
Checkmk fits teams that want GPU telemetry turned into first-class services using config-driven service discovery and check rules to avoid custom dashboard-only alerting.
Production ML teams automating workload-correlated alerts
Comet fits teams that need API-driven automation that maps GPU signals to the active task for faster triage in production settings.
Common GPU monitoring buying mistakes
Buyers often mistake visualization for operational correctness. GPU monitoring fails when the correlation scope does not match the investigation question or when fleet automation ignores collector and label behavior.
Selecting a host-local sensor tool for fleet governance without planning aggregation
Aida64 provides fast local sensor interpretation, but remote multi-host aggregation and fleet dashboards require external tooling. LogicMonitor provides API-driven configuration intended for fleet consistency, so it fits multi-host governance better.
Assuming GPU instrumentation depth equals driver-level forensics
New Relic emphasizes correlating GPU health with traces and deployment events, and it does not position deep driver-level GPU instrumentation as its primary focus. Open Hardware Monitor avoids agent-first stacks, but sensor coverage depends on what the GPU and driver expose.
Treating experiment metadata linkage as optional for ML debugging workflows
Weights & Biases links GPU telemetry to run context through its workflow and API surface, so training regressions can be tied to specific experiments. ClearML also provides run-centric GPU telemetry correlation, so buyers should avoid tools that only show raw device charts when run timelines drive decisions.
Building alerting around high-cardinality GPU labeling without workload scope
New Relic warns that high-cardinality GPU labels can increase operational overhead. Comet focuses on workload-correlated alerting tied to active tasks, which reduces the need for label-heavy attribution in many workflows.
How We Selected and Ranked These Tools
We evaluated Aida64, New Relic, Dynatrace, Prometheus, and the other tools in the Top 10 list by weighting features at 40% and ease and value at 30% each. Features scoring prioritized how GPU telemetry becomes actionable context, including Aida64’s linkage of GPU sensor charts to full system inventory and New Relic’s correlation of GPU health with distributed traces and deployment events.
Ease and value scoring emphasized whether collection and alert correlation fit the tool’s intended workflow, including Open Hardware Monitor’s configurable host-local sensor polling and LogicMonitor’s API-driven configuration for scale. Aida64 ranked highest because local sensor charts and hardware inventory share the same system context, which directly shortens troubleshooting loops on individual hosts.
Frequently Asked Questions About gpu monitoring software
How do Datadog and Dynatrace differ in GPU incident correlation?
Which GPU monitoring tools provide automation through an API for alert wiring?
When is Prometheus the better fit than an all-in-one observability platform for GPU metrics?
What breaks if GPU telemetry collection relies only on host-local polling like Open Hardware Monitor?
Which tools support run-scoped GPU monitoring for ML training and experiment debugging?
How do Checkmk and OpManager handle topology mapping between GPU devices and host assets?
What security and access controls differ between Weights & Biases and Checkmk for shared dashboards?
When do thermal throttling alerts become unreliable in GPU monitoring pipelines, and which tool helps most?
How does Comet’s workload correlation affect triage compared with host-level monitoring views?
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Data Science Analytics alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of data science analytics tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare data science analytics tools→