We performed a comparison between Apica Synthetic and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Management (APM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We appreciate the way that this solution allows us to monitor the ongoing status of the UI at any given time."
"The simplicity of the dashboard is very good."
"It does everything we wanted it to do."
"There are many valuable features in New Relic APM. We developed some software applications and we are able to monitor the errors very easily. Their log security retention is very good."
"The alert mechanism is quite accurate when something goes wrong in your system. For example, if you have hundreds of APIs on your server, and any of the APIs is not performing well, you get an alert. When there is a drop or change in the threshold value, the beauty of New Relic is that within a fraction of seconds, all the stakeholders who are configured in the New Relic system will get an alert. That's one good thing."
"Working with the solution is very easy. It's user-friendly."
"One valuable feature is that the synthetic alert stays open until the issue is resolved. You can actually monitor whether your system is back up."
"The stability of New Relic APM is very good."
"There are several features that are really good. The first one is the flexibility and the advanced configuration that Apica offers when it comes to configuring synthetic checks. It provides the ability to customize how the check should be performed and it is very flexible in the number of synthetic locations that it can use. It allows us to run scripts from different locations all over the world, and they have a really good number of these locations."
"Our application SREs do script checks in such a way that closely mimic our customers' actions using the platform. Because there are so many different ways and options to be able to configure checks to closely mirror your applications' capabilities, it provides a lot of optionality for teams to create the right type of check that can notify when there are any issues. At the end of the day, we want our monitoring tools to be able to catch any outage before our customers do. This is where Apica Synthetic does a great job."
"We see the benefit almost every day. It allows us to be alerted whenever there is a store that is not responding properly around the world. We do have a network operation center (NOC) who receives these alerts, immediately checking if everything is okay."
"The component and cable monitoring are good. SolarWinds is more intuitive and user-friendly than AppDynamics. The AppDynamics console is more complex because it's a more feature-rich solution, so it's not easy for somebody to pick it up."
"Monitoring of processes and services is the most valuable feature. It is not necessarily just the server alone in terms of the CPU or the memory. We can go in-depth into services and processes."
"SolarWinds SAM has provided us with dynamic thresholds based on historical trends and requirements. The threshold gets configured automatically, so it's no longer necessary to configure it manually every time."
"The most valuable feature of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is its powerful monitoring capabilities."
"The initial setup was relatively easy, and we didn't have to install anything. All we had to do was put on the devices we wanted to monitor."
"The most valuable feature of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is the network devices' performance monitor is the best."
"The older view is much better than the new view that they have. We'd like to go back to that previous version. The user interface just isn't as nice as it used to be."
"They should bring the pricing down to be more competitive."
"How granular I could go down at looking at certain data, especially related to the operations, is limited."
"It would be nice if there were pre-made dashboards."
"It is very difficult to award the service level cycles at an endpoint level."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The solution could improve by having more network monitoring features, such as for all the infrastructure."
"I would like the ability to set up certain dummy accounts and do the actual things that the customer is doing, without impacting the production environment."
"There are some components of the user interface that are not up to date. Just to give you an idea, today we have web applications that are called single-page applications that are much faster than the old style of web application. If we can move faster into the flow of the graphic user interface, and in a more effective way, it will save us a lot of time."
"The reporting part that we use for our executives needs a bit more customization capabilities. Right now, you can use only the three main templates for reporting. We would like to be able to customize them."
"We have been focused on reducing polling times for synthetic checks. We have gone from 10 minutes down to five minutes for a pretty broad swath, but there is some appetite to reduce that further, which could be an improvement."
"SAM's software-defined network monitoring capability is also low and could be improved."
"Reporting is the only thing with which we currently have challenges. They have this in two ways. There is the report writer, which is the backend, and we also have web reports, which are on the console. So, they have removed the report writer for the backend reports, and we are making use of the web console, but most of the users are not finding it very interesting to use the frontend reports. I would like them to bring back the report writer. That's the key area within it to improve on the reporting. If they can bring back the report writer, then most users will actually be comfortable. I have some customers who are trying to export their report to an Excel format, but it is not possible because they said any report that has been done from the web console cannot be exported to Excel, but most of the customers need to export their reports to Excel. That's one area they need to work on."
"It should also be easier to upgrade SolarWinds. AppDynamics is harder to deploy but easier to upgrade. So AppDynamics takes a lot of time and effort to install, but you can upgrade it in minutes. SolarWinds is the opposite. It's easy to deploy, but upgrades take forever. To date, nobody can complete it on time, so the production environment is sitting idle."
"SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor could improve the server monitoring and the web application monitoring features are not good. Microsoft SCOM has better server monitoring."
"The stability, flexibility, and ease of use could be improved."
"SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor could improve by having a cloud version. They have an observability platform but it still needs to be maintained by us."
More SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
Apica Synthetic is ranked 22nd in Application Performance Management (APM) with 3 reviews while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is ranked 13th in Application Performance Management (APM) with 6 reviews. Apica Synthetic is rated 8.6, while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Apica Synthetic writes "Enabled us to set up business logic on the availability of our services, with multiple criteria to trigger an alert". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor writes "The component and cable monitoring features are good, but the interface is slow ". Apica Synthetic is most compared with Instana Dynamic APM, AppDynamics, Datadog and Dynatrace, whereas SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is most compared with Azure Monitor, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager and Nagios XI. See our Apica Synthetic vs. SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor report.
See our list of best Application Performance Management (APM) vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Management (APM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
