New Relic Reviews

Regarding use cases, we use it for app support. So basically, we use the APM module, and we also use it for monitoring.

It has helped my organization to dive deeper into the application using the APM module is very helpful. So when we're looking for problems of why an app is behaving incorrectly, we can dive deep into it using the APM module.

I would have to say the APM module is its most valuable feature.

Documentation is one of the biggest things that I have a problem with since its documentation is not clear sometimes.

Logging right now is something I want to improve. So, every log that you have has to have an issue. So logging needs to be probably set right.

I would like to see more logging capabilities in the solution. If they can accept logs, they just can't report. So, I guess reporting on logging is something I want to see in the future.

I have been using New Relic for ten years. Also, I am using the solution's latest version.

The stability of the product is high.

It is a very scalable product.

I rate the support a four out of ten. One of my biggest frustrations was related to its support.

Neutral

New Relic is deployed on the cloud. The ease or complexity of deploying the solution depends on the piece that you're deploying. The app pieces are pretty standard when the infrastructure is more complex.

I have not experienced any return on investment using the solution.

I think it's overpriced for the technical support that we get. We spent over 1,00,000 USD a year.

To those planning to use the solution, I would say to do as much setup as you can upfront with the technical support reps that helped set things up because trying to set it up later is more difficult.

I rate the support a six out of ten.

We recently purchased the Splunk SAM module and are exploring whether it is worth integrating the ITSM module. We are deciding if we can have a proper platform or if we should go with features that New Relic offers.

The synthetics, alerts, and native inbuilt capabilities for monitoring the cloud with the New Relic agents have been helpful.

We had some issues with the New Relic platform showing the sample traces because we want the entire traces to be listed as we are capturing some end-to-end metrics. So we thought it was not just the sample data we needed but the details of every transaction that goes through to the application. The New Relic team is helping fix this, and they have an option we are using in the meantime.

The thing missing from these platforms is connectivity. All the solutions work well with the cloud solutions, but the connectivity between legacy and newer cloud applications is not great. In addition, none of these tools can do end-to-end traceability across the different applications.

We have been using this solution for about four years.

It is a stable solution.

Regarding scalability, we recently extended our contract with New Relic for the next two years.

Regarding support, I think they have a pretty good support team. We have a current issue, and their technical team is on it. They're re-platforming, and there are a lot of alerting modules, so they advised of a bug. We hadn't faced an issue in four years where an existing functionality broke, and this was the first time. They're supporting us around the clock to get it fixed. The support team is also open to feedback. For example, we were building automation solutions and recommended that New Relic have native integration with AWS, so they added an event bridge integration with the AWS platform. So the alerting triggered from New Relic can be sent as an event to the AWS so we can complete our ops, like self-remediation and auto-healing. It's the feedback we provided that supported them in building the product that we needed.

We were using Dynatrace before, and then we switched to New Relic.

We got professional services from New Relic to help with the setup, and they were very helpful. In 2018, we went with their professional services, and their pricing was better at the time and comparatively lower than Dynatrace's. We were shelling out almost a million dollars per year for Dynatrace, but we saved some money once we moved to New Relic. Their professional services were about 60K when we used their support. I recently moved to a new team after a long time, and we have weekly connects with the New Relic team, and there has been a complete restructuring of the teams. So previously, the professional services were topnotch, but it is not as good now.

We feel it's a little bit pricey compared to Splunk. We haven't explored Dynatrace because we have invested so much in New Relic. New Relic changed its pricing model. Initially, we planned to put it into all the systems, but with all the pricing and strategy, we decided to refrain from monitoring. It costs about 600k to 700K per year.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Regarding advice, compared to Dynatrace, Dynatrace is adopting a lot more than New Relic. The problem is we are invested so much in New Relic. We are still trying to decide if New Relic is good for our company or if we should move to Dynatrace or SignalFx. I am not the best person to make that conclusion.

I used it in another organization. I had a project where we were using New Relic for monitoring APIs and utilization of nodes or hosts. It was a standard implementation that involved getting the statistics and configuring New Relic agents on the application servers. The data was sniffed from the network based on the configuration and then it was saved. We were using the out-of-the-box capability of New Relic. We didn't do any customization on New Relic.

It was a good solution. My boss, who was a VP, was very happy with the system, and he didn't want to change the system because it was working well. Whenever anything went wrong, we got clear information about that on the fly. This information helped the operations team in sorting things faster. It gave clear information and a complete picture of what was happening in our system, which helped the operations team in performing the required actions.

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.

There is a dashboard where you can view API-wise performance. When you click specific APIs, you can get detailed statistics for the same.

One thing that we noticed was that historical information was only for a limited period, which was not helpful in certain scenarios. For example, if I want to size my system for an event for New Year or Christmas season based on the historical data, I won't be able to find the historical data. Currently, the data is limited to three months. It would be helpful if they can provide historical data for a longer duration so that we can plan our system accordingly.

It was used for more than four years.

Its stability is quite good. We don't see any issues with the stability.

We never had any challenges because our servers were scaled based on the load. When our load increased, we used to keep adding our servers to New Relic. We didn't see any challenges. It just required the agent configuration on the server. The only thing is that you have to put in more money when you are adding servers.

It was straightforward. We didn't see any complexity because the setup of New Relic on the client side or the application side is more of the agent configuration.

Once your agents are configured in the pre-prod or production environment, the feed used to be taken automatically. The only thing is you have to open the proxy to the New Relic system. If that is done, the rest is taken care of automatically. I don't see any challenge.

For the setup, we had one person from the customer IT who coordinated with the network team and got the proxy opened, and then tested connectivity between the on-premise site and New Relic data center. 

Later on, we had one person for configuration because sometimes, we also did data masking when we wanted to mask certain data. We didn't want that feed to go to the New Relic data center. We didn't want that data to be exposed. To query the system, there were queries available in the New Relic documentation, and we used to follow that. We also had a customized dashboard. We could prepare our own dashboard for our critical use cases such as payments.

I would rate it a four out of five in terms of ROI. 

If I remember it correctly, the pricing was based on the core, and the monthly subscription used to cost us $1,500 or $2,000. 

We had pre-prod and production services. Costing was different for pre-prod and production. For pre-prod, it was 40% less than the production service cost. It was a combined package. 

With our licensing, we could only query three months of data from the New Relic system. When we wanted to have the historical information, they said that it is going to be an additional licensing at an additional cost.

You have to see the costs. If you want to scale to a larger system or you want to implement New Relic for the entire enterprise, the cost is going to be high because you have to run hundreds of servers. If you take the frontend applications, mobile applications, and required servers, there will be a huge load and traffic. Dynatrace is one of the alternatives. Our last customer wanted to scale, and they found Dynatrace to be better than New Relic in terms of features and price. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. It is one of the best products. The customer used it for more than four years before moving to Dynatrace. We were happy with it. The alert mechanism and other features were quite good. 

The primary use case is for synthetic monitoring of all the APIs. It helps to detect if any APIs are failing before a customer detects an issue.

The solution was deployed on cloud.

There were 15 people using this solution. They worked on the configurations and setting alerts for new environments and customers. The solution was used on a daily basis.

At my previous organization, they were planning to replace New Relic with Google Apigee. That was only to be done in conjunction with the cloud migration from the in-house hosted apps.

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.

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. Only the read APIs are called from New Relic, not the write APIs. If we had a test account to do the write part of it, it would give us better monitoring. For example, if we are selecting the data for an existing account, we can do that part of the monitoring with New Relic.

When we see failures and slowness, I would like there to be an option to do a deep dive into a collection of metrics to show the bottlenecks. It would be helpful if it didn't just state the problem, but indicate the areas to look at for a deeper resolution of the problem.

I have used this solution for three years.

It's mostly stable.

It was scalable.

Technical support is responsive, but you need to create a support ticket with the right priority, which is based on certain questions that they ask. If it's created with the right priority, they will respond. If your ticket is created with a lower priority, they will respond on the next business day.

I would rate technical support as five out of five.

I have also used AppDynamics to show us the time that the APIs were at a certain level, like the database level or application level. I think New Relic has started implementing the ability to trace transactions to that level, but I don't know if that feature was well developed because I didn't use it a lot in New Relic. 

In Apigee, for example, they monitor a certain percentage of the transactions to show where the bottlenecks are.

The supportability in AppDynamics is good.

Setup was pretty smooth. I wasn't involved in initial setup, but for newer customers and installations, setup wasn't very cumbersome.

Initial setup was done by New Relic, but we did later installations ourselves.

The pricing is fine.

I would rate this solution as nine out of ten. 

My advice is to have a project plan in terms of what you want to monitor. You can monitor various micro-services, but you probably want to restrict the monitoring to what exactly impacts the customers. Have a plan for implementation, the components you want to monitor first, the components you want to monitor later, and an automation strategy for synthetic monitoring. For example, for the right APIs, think about whether you can have monitoring using synthetic accounts.

We use it to monitor servers. It's just a log in New Relic. I set the start and end times, and then I just pull down the server metrics.

It's not the New Relic APM, it's just the New Relic. There is the one that is New Relic, and then is New Relic APM. It's a bit confusing.

Normally when I use it, it takes me 20 minutes to pull all the data, and I use it maybe once or twice in a month.

We would run a low test, and then after the test, we would log into New Relic and then look at things, including: what are the top five slowest interactions on the servers? What are the slowest database calls? Then, we just pull the graphs from New Relic, and then we give it to the customer and show them here are the calls are being made the most, and that correlates to a slow response time. Then they'll be able to focus on it and try to maybe fix it.

There's another user on our team that sets up the list of servers that need to be monitored. You just click on those servers and then from there you can pull all the data, so that's really helpful. You don't have to go through a list of 500 servers. You click on one server, and it brings up ten servers that are in that environment. You don't have to choose those same ten every time. Instead, you just click on that one link. You just have to click on the name of the group you want to look at, and it'll pull metrics for those same ten or 15 servers each time. That's very helpful.

The customization of the start and end time is kind of cool.

It's stable. 

The solution can scale. 

One of the metrics is total time. I would like to see the true response time of a particular call. It might say top five slowest calls. However, I don't know how they're calculating it. Maybe if they could have documentation for how those things are calculated, that would be a lot easier. If they say the top five slowest methods and the slowest one is three seconds, yet we know that there's a process that's taking ten seconds, it can be kind of confusing. If they could add in their help files, how these columns are calculated, that would make it more transparent. They need to clarify: What does it mean, total time? And how do they calculate the total time? How do they calculate average time? How do they calculate the top five slowest? What is it actually pulling?

I would like to see them introduce integration with LoadRunner; that's a bit easier.

I've used the solution for six to eight months. 

It's a very stable product. Overall it's a good product.

We have eight or ten people using the solution at this time. It is used occasionally, once or twice a month, just to pull out the data for the server monitoring and for the reports.

The solution can scale well. 

I've never called New Relic support. I never really needed to.

I'm also aware of Dynatrace. In Dynatrace, they have an integration with LoadRunner. You just have to add one or two lines of code in LoadRunner, and it will integrate with that, which is really good. 

New Relic doesn't have the option of integration with LoadRunner.

I did not install New Relic. By the time I was put on the project, it had already been installed.

They just let me know the ID and password, and I just logged in, and that was it.

As far as pricing goes, I heard that they charge per user ID. If we have ten people with ten IDs right now, if we want to add another five more, they'll charge us for each ID, so that is something that is maybe a concern. I actually heard this from one of their competitors. I've heard Dynatrace say that New Relic's pricing model was very expensive, so that would be a concern.

I'm not sure of the exact price of each user ID.

My organization is a customer of New Relic. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. If it had better, easier integrations, I'd rate it higher. 

The main purpose we are using New Relic is to enable application backend and frontend performance monitoring. We enable synthetic monitoring for the application team and for the business owners of the applications. Additionally, we
on-host integration for different DBs, SQL, and Oracle.

The most valuable feature of New Relic is its ease of use.

New Relic does enable frontend performance monitoring by default. However, when we are troubleshooting the issue, New Relic is not able to trace back to the service where the issue is. Other solutions, such as Dynatrace are better.

Dynatrace provides security vulnerabilities for all applications and this is where New Relic lacks. Additionally, there should be more use cases for automation.

From the application team's perspective, they should be able to identify the issue before it occurs. This is the main feature that any monitoring tool should have.  New Relic was not able to trace back to the original method of the transactions where the issue occurred. This area needs to be improved.

I have been using New Relic for approximately two years.

New Relic is a highly stable solution.

New Relic is scalable. I have not seen an issue with the scalability. We have over 600 applications and a very high number of users using the solution and there has not ever been a performance issue.

I have contacted the support from New Relic when things do not work as expected or when some framework is not supported. Some of the support agents do not get back to us for weeks, but others do answer more quickly. The support could improve.

I rate the support from New Relic a five out of ten.

Neutral

I have used AppDynamics previously and New Relic is easier to use and user-friendly. 

I have also used Dyatrace and prefer New Relic because of its license and usability. However, if I look at the features I then would choose Dynatrace, it has more features.

The initial setup of New Relic is easy. I do not have to use the documentation a lot of the time because it has a guided installation method. We have automated a lot of the tasks needed with other tools such as Ansible and ServerNow catalog tasks.

The deployment of 20 or 30 servers without automation would take a lot of time. There are many different agents and components. There are other solutions that are not as difficult, such as Dynatrace. However, they only have one module.

This solution required a license and it is better than some other competitors.

My advice to new users of this solution is it's easy to use and look for the most secure features.

I rate New Relic an eight out of ten.

I gave my rating because the solution provides simplicity and the license is one of the best compared to other tools.

We used New Relic APM for monitoring our data.

The synthetic alert is the most valuable feature in New Relic APM. I also like the time travel feature and find traceability useful in the solution.

New Relic APM also has good response times.

In the pro licensing model of the solution, my company used the data analysis feature more and took care of more complex workloads that my team could easily track. Data analysis is another feature of New Relic APM which I found helpful.

The UX/UI design of New Relic APM could be improved. The solution currently has some slow pages in terms of loading and viewing the pages, for example, the reports. The reports and other pages take a long time to load, so if that area could be improved, especially when looking for data, it would enhance New Relic APM.

I started using New Relic APM around March of this year, 2022, until June, so my experience with it is almost a year.

New Relic APM is a very stable solution.

You can scale New Relic APM, but I expected it to be more scalable.

If you contact New Relic APM technical support during office hours, then the team is responsive, but sometimes, it's delayed, especially when you contact support during offline hours. New Relic APM support is limited, so I'd rate this area as three out of five.

I used Dynatrace before using New Relic APM, but that was in my past organization. I switched to New Relic APM because I moved to another organization. I also use Datadog, but mostly, it's New Relic APM that I'm using.

In my current organization, I did some POCs, but not effectively, so I've only used New Relic APM and no other solutions, at least in the organization I belong to now.

I used to handle the New Relic APM setup process more for algorithms, mainly writing algorithms to define the rules for better tracking. I focused on the time travel, traceability, and other valuable features of the solution, primarily monitoring and not the initial setup for New Relic APM because the IT team took care of that process.

On the part I handled, the process was seamless, and there was nothing complex about it, but it could be because I asked for help from the IT team. The process was average. It wasn't very smooth and wasn't very complex either, so neutral.

The initial setup for New Relic APM, which was done by the IT team, took more than a day.

The IT department took care of deploying New Relic APM. The implementation was in-house, and New Relic gave my company a server similar to a one-of-a-kind setup tool that you can install within half a day.

The IT department handles New Relic APM licensing, but the solution is priced reasonably. I'm actively using the mobile monitoring function of New Relic APM, and it's one of the best products for me because it's economical, so anyone can easily pick it over other solutions and use it. It has basic features.

My company went for the New Relic APM sixty-day free trial, so there was a limitation to the number of people that could use the product. It only allowed twenty-one users maximum.

New Relic presented New Relic APM pricing and packages very well. For example, there's silver and platinum, and each package was easy and more economical than other tools. In this context, I'd recommend New Relic APM because of its reasonable price and package.

My company initially used the standard New Relic APM package, and by the end of the month, it moved to the pro model, which had low, flexible pricing.

I was into this Dynatrace, a monitoring tool in my previous organization, but not now.

I'm now using New Relic APM at an organizational level rather than a personal level.

New Relic APM has an on-premise deployment; though my company planned to deploy it on the cloud, it wasn't successful, so another solution for cloud deployment is now being tested from AWS.

As New Relic APM is one of the best solutions in the market, my rating for it is eight out of ten. I didn't give it a ten because of the support, reporting, and UI/UX that need improvement.

I'd recommend the solution even to startups or novices planning to do some monitoring, and in the future, New Relic APM could compete with similar tools used by the experts.

At the moment, nine people, mostly software engineers, use New Relic APM within my organization. The software engineers get the alerts from the product.

New Relic APM requires maintenance by a minimum of three resources, and it would depend on the requirements, tools, and features. For example, my company currently uses three New Relic APM platforms, web, mobile, and desktop.

My company is just a user, not a partner of New Relic APM.

The solution is an APM monitoring tool.

We will be monitoring all kinds of server details, including how the application is handling things and any threat count, as well as if there are any network utilization failures or problems with DNA instance ports.

The transaction summary is great. It's very helpful for reporting. 

The initial setup was not that difficult. 

It's stable.

The pricing is pretty good. 

The solution is scalable. 

There were some settings we had issues with. For example, a certain setting to change the time zone. If we change the time zone, it will take 24 hours to reflect the time zone and make the changes. It'll be great if the settings once we change them, reflect the change at least after one hour. That would be helpful so that we don't need to wait for one complete day to see the changes.

I've been using the solution for one and a half years. 

The stability is great. It's reliable. I'd rate the stability four out of five in terms of reliability. There are no bugs or glitches. 

The scalability is good. I'd rate it five out of five. It is easy to expand. 

I've never dealt with technical support. 

There were no other tools being used previously. This was the first we were recommended, and we deployed it.

It's a straightforward setup. It's not overly difficult or complex. 

I'd rate the solution four out of five in terms of ease of setup. 

Mainly the setup was done by the box team, so they were using it for their purposes and for the log activity. I'm just part of testing team, so I'm focusing more on the reporting side. The setup was not done from my end; the DevOps team managed the process.

We have mostly one person handling the setup and it took about two to three weeks.

We have a third party that manages the maintenance. There might be four to five people maintaining everything. 

Our own team handled the initial setup. 

I'm not sure if we've seen an ROI at this point. 

I'm not aware of the exact licensing costs. My understanding is that it is affordable. I'd rate it four out of five. 

We likely py a yearly licensing fee. It's all-inclusive, and there are no extra fees. 

I did not handle any evaluations on my end. I'm not sure if the company looked at other options. 

We are customers and end-users. 

Since we're working on a cloud-based deployment, the solution is always up to date. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's user-friendly and has many automated features. I'd recommend the solution to others.