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.

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 New Relic APM to gather performance monitoring metrics such as thread count, CPU, response time, JVMs, and DB connectivity. New Relic APM is an observability tool.

To me, the most valuable feature of New Relic APM is the traceability, mainly based on the time travel method, so you get the overall response time, which is pretty helpful for developers and ADR techs looking into issues on a deeper level.

New Relic APM is a very good, tailor-made solution.

Documentation could be improved in New Relic APM, so users would have more clarity on configuring the dashboard. If New Relic gave better guidelines, users would find it easier to understand the metrics and features of New Relic APM.

Another area for improvement is integration with Kubernetes. Currently, the process isn't user-friendly. It's challenging and lacks documentation for users to understand how to integrate New Relic APM with Kubernetes quickly. With multiple levels of Kubernetes dockers and other DBs on different clouds, it's tricky to gather all into New Relic APM on a single dashboard.

What I'd like to see in the next version of New Relic APM is a single dashboard where you can easily view which applications fall under specific APMs. If there's a search feature where you can type in a keyword to find out if an APM is related to a particular application, that would be great.

I've been using New Relic APM for four years now.

New Relic APM is a stable solution, and I've never seen any outages from it.

New Relic APM is a scalable solution.

Support for New Relic APM is up to the mark, mainly because I belong to a big organization with dedicated email and Slack support. The support team gives clarifications about usability and configurations. I'm giving New Relic APM support a five on a scale of one to five.

My company also uses AppDynamics and Datadog for some of the applications, but those will be moved entirely to New Relic APM, as the tool is very user-friendly and has no lags. AppDynamics, on the other hand, has some delay, and you have to inject some methods in writing applications to gather the metrics. Performance-wise, New Relic APM is better and doesn't cause a high response time compared to other solutions.

Other teams handle the installation and configuration for New Relic APM.

I'm unaware of how much the license for New Relic APM costs.

My company is currently using New Relic APM.

Over a thousand people from different teams use New Relic APM within the company. My company currently has two hundred to three hundred applications, so even if New Relic APM is used occasionally, because of the number of applications it's being used on, usage of the tool could result in almost daily usage.

As New Relic APM is user-friendly, it's a tool I can recommend to others, but before making the purchase, you should utilize the free trial version, and also look at the sample dashboards provided by New Relic, which you can show to the customers to better explain how the dashboards look and what New Relic APM is used for.

My rating for New Relic APM is eight out of ten, as there's always space for improvement.

My company is a customer of New Relic APM.

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. 

We have our current parameters and our current dashboards. Our main purpose is to continue to migrate and get the same metrics in New Relic. We will prepare another secondary dashboard between the parameters. And we will do a lot of monitoring on it as it is mainly used for monitoring purposes.

The monitoring so far has been good and we are happy with it. 

I haven't come across any features that are lacking. 

I've only used the solution for two or three months. 

It's very stable. We have currently around 150 GB of data that we are going to analyze. Almost each and every day around 75 to 80 GB is analyzed. We haven't had issues with the volume or with bugs or glitches. 

The solution scales well. 

London mostly handles any troubleshooting. I don't have to worry about reaching out to technical support. we do have the documentation we can reference, however, if we do need assistance. 

I've used Stackdriver in the past. However, it doesn't work well, with, for example, virtual machines.

The initial setup was done by our London team. I wasn't involved in the process and don't have any real details about how it went. 

I'm not sure if any ongoing maintenance is needed.

While it's my understanding that our in-house London team handled the implementation, I can't say if they needed help or recruited consultants or integrators to assist in the process. 

While we do pay for the solution on a monthly basis, I can't speak to the exact cost of the product. There might also be some additional costs on top of the licensing, however, I can't say with certainty. 

I'd recommend companies try it out and see if they like it. 

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. We've been happy with it so far. 

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.