Softwr

Energy · head to head

iHawk by Cyberhawk vs Yokogawa CENTUM VP

iHawk by Cyberhawk logo

iHawk by Cyberhawk

Energy

Asset inspection data platform sold by a drone inspection service company, not standalone software

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Yokogawa CENTUM VP logo

Yokogawa CENTUM VP

Manufacturing

Distributed control system for continuous process plants with a documented 30-year upgrade path

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: iHawk by Cyberhawk cyberhawk's business is inspection services, so the platform is normally sold as part of a capture contract and the software line item cannot be compared cleanly against standalone asset inspection platforms; Yokogawa CENTUM VP there is no published price list and no way to size a budget without engaging Yokogawa or an EPC, so early-stage comparison against DeltaV or Experion is guesswork until quotations arrive.
  • They diverge on capability: iHawk by Cyberhawk covers Visual data management, Yokogawa CENTUM VP covers Field Control Station.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which iHawk by Cyberhawk and Yokogawa CENTUM VP actually diverge.

Attributes where iHawk by Cyberhawk and Yokogawa CENTUM VP differ
AttributeiHawk by CyberhawkYokogawa CENTUM VP
PlatformsWebWindows, On-premise
CategoryEnergyManufacturing

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in iHawk by Cyberhawk

  • Visual data management
  • Defect tagging and tracking
  • Visualive AI review
  • Geospatial layers
  • Asset hierarchy
  • Progress monitoring
  • Reporting and export

Only in Yokogawa CENTUM VP

  • Field Control Station
  • N-IO
  • Human Interface Station
  • ProSafe-RS integration
  • Vnet/IP
  • Migration from CS 1000 and CS 3000
  • Exaquantum integration
  • Alarm management

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

iHawk by Cyberhawk

  • A transmission operator inspecting several thousand towers annually that needs defect history per structure rather than a folder of photographs per campaignnot Yokogawa CENTUM VP
  • An offshore operator that wants flare tip and structural inspection imagery held against the same asset tags used in its maintenance systemnot Yokogawa CENTUM VP
  • A capital project owner tracking construction progress from repeated aerial capture over a two year buildnot Yokogawa CENTUM VP
  • A utility responding to a regulator that requires evidence of condition assessment across a defined asset populationnot Yokogawa CENTUM VP

Yokogawa CENTUM VP

  • Replacing end-of-life CENTUM CS 3000 controllers during a refinery turnaround without pulling field cablingnot iHawk by Cyberhawk
  • Greenfield LNG train where the control and safety systems must share one operator console and one event lognot iHawk by Cyberhawk
  • Specialty chemicals batch plant needing sequence control with recipe management and full electronic batch recordsnot iHawk by Cyberhawk
  • Combined cycle power station where 99.99999 percent availability figures are written into the contractnot iHawk by Cyberhawk

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

iHawk by Cyberhawk

  • Cyberhawk's business is inspection services, so the platform is normally sold as part of a capture contract and the software line item cannot be compared cleanly against standalone asset inspection platforms
  • Nothing is published about price, and because contracts bundle flights, processing and platform access, the recurring cost after the inspection campaign ends is often not clear at signature
  • The value of the platform grows with the length of the historical series held in it, which makes switching increasingly expensive over time and gives the vendor leverage at renewal
  • It is a review and management platform rather than an enterprise asset management system, so defect findings still need to reach SAP or Maximo to become work orders, and that integration is a project in its own right
  • Automated defect detection reduces review effort but does not remove the need for qualified inspection engineers to sign off findings, so headcount savings are smaller than a technology-led business case usually assumes

Yokogawa CENTUM VP

  • There is no published price list and no way to size a budget without engaging Yokogawa or an EPC, so early-stage comparison against DeltaV or Experion is guesswork until quotations arrive.
  • Engineering and commissioning routinely cost several times the hardware and software, and owners who budget from the equipment quote alone are consistently short.
  • The ecosystem is closed: controllers, I/O and diagnostics are Yokogawa, and third-party alternatives at the controller layer do not exist, so the vendor holds pricing power for the twenty years or more the plant runs.
  • Operator stations run on Windows and are tied to specific validated Windows releases, so operating system end-of-life forces console refresh cycles that are governed by Yokogawa validation rather than by your IT policy.
  • Engineering staff who know CENTUM are scarce outside Japan, the Middle East and South East Asia, and in North America and Europe you will pay a premium or depend on Yokogawa’s own services organisation for changes.

Pricing, plan by plan

iHawk by Cyberhawk

On request
  • iHawk platform$undefined/year
    • Usually contracted together with Cyberhawk inspection services
    • Priced by asset count, data volume and inspection programme scope
    • Standalone platform licensing available on request but not the standard route

Yokogawa CENTUM VP

On request
  • CENTUM VP$undefined/year
    • Priced as an engineered system, not a per-seat licence
    • Cost driven by I/O count, controller redundancy and number of operator stations
    • Engineering, FAT, commissioning and training quoted separately and usually exceed hardware

Which should you pick?

Choose iHawk by Cyberhawk if

  • You need visual data management.
  • You also want defect tagging and tracking.
iHawk by Cyberhawk review

Choose Yokogawa CENTUM VP if

  • You need field control station.
  • You work on Windows, On-premise.
  • You also want n-io.
Yokogawa CENTUM VP review

Questions people ask

Is iHawk by Cyberhawk or Yokogawa CENTUM VP better?
Neither clearly leads. iHawk by Cyberhawk starts at On request and Yokogawa CENTUM VP at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, iHawk by Cyberhawk or Yokogawa CENTUM VP?
iHawk by Cyberhawk starts at On request and Yokogawa CENTUM VP at On request.
Does iHawk by Cyberhawk or Yokogawa CENTUM VP run on more platforms?
iHawk by Cyberhawk runs on Web. Yokogawa CENTUM VP runs on Windows, On-premise.
What is iHawk by Cyberhawk best used for?
iHawk by Cyberhawk is most often used for a transmission operator inspecting several thousand towers annually that needs defect history per structure rather than a folder of photographs per campaign, an offshore operator that wants flare tip and structural inspection imagery held against the same asset tags used in its maintenance system, a capital project owner tracking construction progress from repeated aerial capture over a two year build, a utility responding to a regulator that requires evidence of condition assessment across a defined asset population. Of those, a transmission operator inspecting several thousand towers annually that needs defect history per structure rather than a folder of photographs per campaign and an offshore operator that wants flare tip and structural inspection imagery held against the same asset tags used in its maintenance system are not what Yokogawa CENTUM VP is typically brought in for.
What can iHawk by Cyberhawk do that Yokogawa CENTUM VP cannot?
iHawk by Cyberhawk covers Visual data management, Defect tagging and tracking, Visualive AI review, Geospatial layers. Yokogawa CENTUM VP covers Field Control Station, N-IO, Human Interface Station, ProSafe-RS integration.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

iHawk by Cyberhawk: Can I buy iHawk without Cyberhawk's inspection services?

Ask explicitly. The company positions the platform as enterprise software, but its normal route to market is bundled with data capture, so standalone terms are negotiated rather than listed.

Yokogawa CENTUM VP: Can I upgrade from CENTUM CS 3000 without rewiring the plant?

Yes. Yokogawa sells migration packages that replace the controller and keep existing field wiring and marshalling, which is the main reason CENTUM installations stay CENTUM.

iHawk by Cyberhawk: Who owns the inspection data?

That is contract-specific and should be settled before signature, including what format you receive on exit and whether historical defect tagging comes with you.

Yokogawa CENTUM VP: Is CENTUM VP sold as a subscription?

No. It is a capital purchase of hardware and licences with an annual service agreement for updates and support.

iHawk by Cyberhawk: What does it cost?

Not published. Expect pricing driven by asset count, data volume and the scope of the inspection programme.

Yokogawa CENTUM VP: How does it compare with Emerson DeltaV on cost?

Neither publishes prices. CENTUM tends to win on brownfield migration cost because the field wiring stays; DeltaV tends to be cheaper on small greenfield systems.

iHawk by Cyberhawk: Does it replace an asset management system?

No. It manages inspection data and findings. Work orders and maintenance planning stay in SAP, Maximo or your equivalent.

Yokogawa CENTUM VP: Do I need a separate safety system?

Yes, for SIL-rated functions. ProSafe-RS is the Yokogawa SIS and shares the CENTUM engineering database and operator console.

Share

Related pages

More on iHawk by Cyberhawk

More on Yokogawa CENTUM VP

Keep looking

Other head to heads