New Relic Reviews

We use New Relic for collecting the metrics on microservices and databases.

New Relic's dashboard is nice, and it's reliable. It's also compatible with many services, especially Java and the Python ecosystem.

One thing I'd like to see in any APM, especially New Relic, is the ability to use distributed transactions. When one microservice calls another, it calls another database and microservice. The entire data visualization layer will not be able to correlate from one microservice from end to end and return on that path. Distributed transactions would be a great addition that would make life simpler. Unfortunately, no APM has that end-to-end capability. 

When I say "distributed transactions," I'm not only talking about the database level. It needs more and better visualization of communications across various microservices and integration with logs.

We have used New Relic APM for more than a year. 

I rate New Relic eight out of 10 for stability. 

I rate New Relic eight out of 10 for scalability. We have around 150 users, including nine or 10 DevOps people acting as admins. 

I previously used AppDynamics. I liked it a lot. Since the acquisition, we've mostly used New Relic. I prefer AppDynamics because I'm familiar with it, and it's easy to use. I don't remember the specifics about features, but I liked the overall feel of AppDynamics.

The initial setup isn't complex. I haven't deployed it, but my colleagues say it is easy.

The return on investment is definitely good. You need an APM in any development setup if you plan to deploy multiple services. It's a fundamental part of the process. I can't compare the ROI to New Relic's competitors, but you need an APM. 

I think the price is reasonable compared to AppDynamics. I don't know the license costs, but most of my startups are using New Relic. Those startups are sensitive about prices, so it's affordable. 

I rate New Relic APM seven out of 10. I would rate it eight as a solution for startups. If you want to implement something quickly and easily, New Relic should be your first choice. However, I would pick Dynatrace to explore deeper aspects of special transactions and distributed setups.

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.

I use New Relic for monitoring and observing the entire environment. It offers end-to-end monitoring and observability to predict potential impacts in the coming weeks. For instance, it can detect if two endpoints start consuming more bandwidth than usual, thereby providing more insights about potential impacts on the environment.

New Relic helps us maintain and shape the environment from a network perspective by providing end-to-end monitoring and observability. It offers insights into normal and peak behaviors, alerts us to any issues, and assists with remediation plans.

The APM feature is highly valuable as it can record session hosts, usage, and diagnose customer behaviors. Additionally, we can simulate user actions to assess the user experience. The alerting capabilities are also efficient, sending emails and desktop notifications, and providing remediation options.

The pricing could be improved as it is quite high relative to what is offered. The cost versus performance efficiency could be better. Apart from that, I don't need any specific improvements to the features themselves.

I have been working with New Relic for over one and a half years.

New Relic is highly stable. I have never experienced an outage or any misbehavior with this solution.

New Relic offers high scalability. It is quite flexible and can scale according to our needs.

The technical support team for New Relic is good. I would rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

Before New Relic, we did not use any specific solution for observability. We used normal monitoring tools.

The initial setup of New Relic is super easy and straightforward. It involves proposing the solution to the client, activating administrative users, and customizing dashboards and alerts based on customer needs. Training and preparation made the process smooth and efficient.

The deployment typically requires two to three tier-one or tier-two team members from the technical team.

The pricing is relatively high. It can be quite costly compared to the performance efficiency, making it not very value for money, especially for smaller businesses.

We evaluated several other options like Datadog. However, after comparing prices and support, we chose New Relic.

Do not implement New Relic until you have identified your needs and ensured that it meets your specific requirements. Proper assessment and planning are crucial.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

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. 

The primary use case of the solution is to monitor, log, and investigate incidents.

The most valuable features are the dashboards and tracing.

It is complex to use and it can be improved by simplifying it by making it more user-friendly. I would like to see the option to group alert conditions added.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The support team helped to resolve any issues I had.

The setup is moderate. 

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

I suggest anyone interested in using the solution should learn the query language first. It is a serious tool and requires a lot of time invested in order to understand how it works.

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.

The use case for this solution is the same as Azure Monitor. They have the same coverage for the use case. In the end, we switched to Azure Monitor.

It is for the application quality process and the live system support monitoring.

We like the performance of the product. It's very good, very reliable.

All features are all capable to responding to our requirements. There's no problem on this side. 

The solution can scale. 

The initial setup isn't a big deal. Our admins can handle it. 

The solution is quite expensive. 

We've been using the solution for about two years at this point. It hasn't been too long. 

It's stable. It is reliable. The performance has been good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable. It's not a problem to expand as necessary. 

We have two or three users on the product right now. 

Previously, we did not use other application performance management products.

We also use Azure Monitor. They are very much the same. However, we've since moved over to Azure Monitor.

It's not as straightforward a setup as Azure Monitor. Then again, we have admins, and they were managing that part. It's not a big deal.

We have two admins that can handle deployment and maintenance. 

The price is an issue. It's quite expensive.

That said, I can't speak to the exact pricing. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using and if it's the latest version or not. 

We'd recommend the product if budgeting is not a concern for a company.

I'd rate it nine out of ten. We were pretty happy with its capabilities. 

I use the solution in my company to monitor the applications' performance and do some stress tests on the application. In our company, we use the tool to monitor the core application inside the data center. In some cases, New Relic is used to monitor users' access to the applications.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to execute queries and analyze the data. For all the data, the tool has a specific function with which you can spot and mix the data or correlate the data wherever you want. It is easy to simulate and execute queries, and the availability of the data is very nice. The tool gives you a basic way to manage the data.

The product's initial setup phase is not straightforward to manage if you have no experience with installations, making it an area that can be improved.

I have been using New Relic for a year. My company is in partnership with New Relic.

I think the support of the tool is a good option. I think the support of the tool. I rate the tool's support an eight and a half out of ten.

Positive

I have experience with Catchpoint. With New Relic, you monitor the application from within. You monitor all the communication calls between the application and all the systems that the application needs to use, such as databases or servers. With Catchpoint, you can monitor user experience and how it interacts with the application, so we are monitoring from the outside, which is from the user to the application.

For the product's initial setup phase, you need to have a background of doing installations. It is not a straightforward process, as you need to have more skills to do the tool's setup. The tool's setup phase is a little bit more complex but with the correct knowledge, it can still be very easy. You have to have some prior knowledge in installation to start with the tool's setup phase.

For the product's deployment phase, you need around 20 people because you need the people who do the installation and connections, along with the owner of the platform or the database, for which there is a need to create some access using New Relic. You have to do some configurations or partitions to install the agent. You need to have an expert on New Relic, as well as the user or the administrator of the infrastructure where the tool will be installed, so customizations can be done if needed.

The time required to deploy the solution depends on the amount of installations required and the architecture where the solution will be used. One agent can be deployed in maybe 30 minutes. Depending on whether you have everything in place and people know what they are doing, it may take 30 minutes to deploy the tool.

The tool can not be related to productivity. The product helps the development team that develops and makes changes in the applications. The tool helps a lot and provides a lot of information to the development teams so they do not have to do simulations. With all the information that New Relic provides, the development teams can just make decisions about the changes within the applications during the development. The tool offers information about the business process. With the tool, you can have all the information related to all the purchases from the marketplace and understand why the purchases were okay or why not, why the people that are logging in are not making any purchases, along with all the information related to the business process that are very helpful for the business.

The product is neither cheap nor expensive, and I believe that it is a competitively-priced tool.

I don't know how the alerting mechanism in New Relic has improved our company's response time. I am more into the demo part, so I am not a user of the tool.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.