We performed a comparison between New Relic and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: New Relic offers more comprehensive application information, reliable monitoring, scalability, accurate alerts, and better dashboard design. It also has a simpler user interface and provides a complete platform for monitoring and analytical features. While SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor has valuable features, it lacks code-level application monitoring and software-defined network monitoring capability, and has room for improvement in various areas such as stability, flexibility, and pricing.
"The service maps that it creates, the health maps that it creates, the insights that it provides, etc., are all quite useful."
"The most valuable features are infrastructure monitoring and application performance monitoring (APM)."
"They instrument up from the bottom to the top – every piece of code - they have a very perfect read of what’s being done, and how long it’s taking."
"The solution is quite stable."
"Support for plug-ins (RMQ, Redis etc.) is a valuable feature."
"End-user Synthetics and monitoring are very good."
"The tool's most valuable features were APM and core reliability. We get alerts whenever an anomaly is detected. The solution is very friendly."
"New Relic's dashboard is nice, and it's reliable. It's also compatible with many services, especially Java and the Python ecosystem."
"The solution is end-to-end from the network and the application to the processes. Everything about the enterprise infrastructure is being covered by the solution. It's easy to use and easy to navigate and one of the leaders among monitoring solutions."
"The solution can be deployed quickly."
"The solution is great for monitoring. If something is going wrong, we can immediately find the root cause."
"The solution has good alerts. Notifications are sent via email to technicians. You can filter the kinds of alerts you want to receive as well. It's excellent."
"The most valuable feature is the Access Rights Manager."
"Management Console - Managing service to each server enrolled in the Solarwinds is much easier. Using a web base console, you can control your service much convenient way. There is no need to login remotely. It save a lot of time and effort."
"It's good at monitoring system-specific things like ports, services."
"I adore the NTA module that provides deep details on ingress/egress traffic for any interface. With a few clicks, you can correlate who is accessing what and when, beside the bandwidth consuming applications/users."
"The scalability can be improved."
"The price needs improvement."
"We would like a dashboard feature to be created for this product. This would allow us to monitor both the front and back-end of our UIs performance, and then report on it."
"New Relic APM can improve the information when we dig deeper to check a problem. There should be more detailed information provided."
"The price could improve."
"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."
"Compared to their competitors, they are missing some features at the moment."
"How granular I could go down at looking at certain data, especially related to the operations, is limited."
"I believe that some of the trends, environmental maps, and items like those found in Orion would be very beneficial."
"The major concern in the product revolves around application performance monitoring since end-to-end application monitoring is not possible with the tool."
"The product needs to reduce its price."
"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."
"The templates could use improvement. Currently, they are quite complex. They should have drag-and-drop functionality instead. It would make it easier to use."
"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."
"When you implement SolarWinds on a larger scale my customers complain about the speed."
"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."
More SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
New Relic is ranked 3rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 151 reviews while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is ranked 21st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 38 reviews. New Relic is rated 8.6, while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of New Relic writes "Has a simple user interface and end-to-end monitoring and self-healing features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor writes "We use this product for base and application monitoring. ". New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Azure Monitor, whereas SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is most compared with Azure Monitor, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and BMC TrueSight Operations Management. See our New Relic vs. SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.
