New Relic Reviews

We are currently in the POC phase with New Relic APM and are looking at using it mainly for analytics.

We integrated the library within our backend service to see the throughput and to monitor latency. We also created a few dashboards in the New Relic dashboard section to observe the traffic and monitor how the system performs during the day.

It is easier to create new dashboards in the New Relic interface, and it is also easier to query if when I want to monitor a different parameter or time duration on my dashboard.

I like the overall monitoring and analytical features. It is a complete platform in that regard.

Some AIOps are missing in New Relic APS, and I would like to see more features in this area.

I've been using New Relic APM for approximately four months.

I would rate New Relic's stability at eight out of ten.

On a scale from one to ten, with one being low and ten being high, I would give scalability a rating of eight.

The initial setup is straightforward for this solution.

New Relic APM is a mature platform, and in terms of features and maturity, it is up there with other APMs like Datadog and a few others. Therefore, it is definitely worth considering.

Overall, I would rate New Relic at eight on a scale from one to 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 service map feature is very useful.

The simplicity of the dashboard is very good. It shows the throughput latency and all of the transactions.

It offers transactions, but it does not offer an endpoint-level insight at the URL level. When we get a request, we want to know what the life cycle of that service is, and where the cycle is. This is what I am trying to locate with most of the solutions now.

I am trying to research how to find a cycle per endpoint and not at the service level.

It is very difficult to award the service level cycles at an endpoint level. It is important for us to get new insights to create better hygiene around the business use cases.

At the endpoint level, the visibility is not that great, and metrics are not available. It gives you a full view of the entire function's execution and not from the context of the URL altogether.

Also the response time, the latency contribution, and the throughput contribution are areas that need improvement. You can get the throughput contribution from New Relic, but not the latency contributions. You cannot get it at all.

These are the major limitations. When working with AppDynamics, I did not find any limitations, but the same can not be said with New Relic.

The way that it classifies the actual services is a bit ambiguous. It's not perfect. For example, I see there are certain solutions that are listed as extra services, as a dependency, and still I find that among load contribution, it tries to show that those services separately, which is confusing.

With the transactions, when it tries to show a type of "bufferHandler" from inside, it doesn't show what the nature of the request is. Especially with Microservices, it doesn't show what kind of method is present, which makes finding data very difficult. Instead, you need to go to the raw data. I think that defeats the purpose of using this tool.

The transactions do not show the time consumed by the request, from the metrics execution perspective. It was suggested that I did not know how to read it but I have done all that I could. It is very difficult to relate to and requires a lot of experience and time to read through, which it should not.

It should not be difficult to find the latency and throughput for the entire system when requested. It should not be difficult to develop the data that relates to the various types of execution.

It should have complete exposure around the endpoints.

The services-to-service dependency is fine but most of the startups have only one or two services that are all cycled. It does not provide you with a lot of help when you are showing that the two services are dependent.

What all of the dependent endpoints are and how are the cycles being formed is information that should be available in most tools, but not with New Relic and some other tools.

I have been using New Relic APM for one year, but in-depth in the last two months.

We are not using the latest version but within the year.

Almost all of the developers are using this solution in our organization. We have approximately 60 users.

It is used on a day-to-day basis.

I have not used technical support.

Previously, almost four years ago, I used AppDynamics. I think that it is a very good tool. I would rate AppDymanmics an eight out of ten.

We changed to another solution because of the cost. All of the developers loved the AppDynamics dashboard. It was very clear.

I was not a part of the team for the setup but my impression is that the documentation could have been better. It didn't make much sense. 

For beginners using New Relic, the setup can be difficult and should be simplified. 

We have a DevOps team to maintain this solution, but it doesn't require a lot of maintenance.

I think the pricing is reasonable.

There is a good bare minimum of required features for this tool, but if they are out to the in-depth analysis then finding a cross-dimensional relationship is not straightforward. It is difficult to implement.

If you are concerned about how your services behave, then New Relic shouldn't be your first choice. However, if you are considering New Relic APM, is a very affordable choice.

I would rate New Relic APM a seven out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for time series analysis. 

The solution is good for sending alerts, drawing graphs about system usage, and creating plug-ins. 

The solution should include more detailed reports for SQL database requests. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is very stable and working fine. 

The solution is scalable and has been used for both small and big projects that scaled over time with no issues. 

Technical support is knowledgeable, responds quickly, and provides good assistance.

I rate support a ten out of ten. 

Positive

We migrated from AppNeta because the solution is more stable and cost effective. 

The setup is easy and plug-ins can be written for any differences required. 

I rate setup a ten out of ten. 

We implement the solution in-house for customers and offer both on-premises and cloud options. 

I prefer the on-premises option because I like to configure and set things up rather than using ready-to-go options. 

The solution does not require ongoing maintenance because it works fine and runs with no troubles. 

The solution is less expensive than AppNeta. 

There were some benefits to using AppNeta. It provided more detailed stats and graphs for hosting products. If you need more specific digitalization based on system stats, you might want to go with AppNeta. For our use cases, it was less stable and more expensive than the solution. 

The solution is an excellent product for time series and operation analyses. It is a good and stable solution, has a good price, includes good usability features, and includes good support. 

I rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

The APM is great.

The solution can scale well. 

We've found support to be helpful.

It has a simple initial setup. 

The browser isn't exactly reliable. 

There are dashboard issues that need to be dealt with. 

There's no proper management of roles and divisions. For example, let's say if I create a dashboard and I want to give access only to a set of people and not to the other set of people, I can't do that, and that's where it has a lot of problems. If I develop a dashboard for myself, everyone else has an access to it. There's no proper access management. You just add someone to the platform, he gets access to all the dashboards. Yet there should be proper division of people who need to have access to a certain dashboard. 

I've been using the solution for three years.

While the APM is stable, the browser itself isn't too reliable. 

It's a scalable, reliable solution. 

We have 30 to 40 people working on the solution generally.

The technical support is quite good.

Positive

The solution is very simple to set up. I'd rate the entire implementation and deployment experience a five out of five. 

I've not witnessed any ROI. That's beyond my scope. 

I'm not aware of the exact licensing cost. The contracts are handled at an organizational level. 

We have a partnership with New Relic.

I'd advise potential new users to go through the docs first. They have very good documentation. Anybody who's going to start should first start with reading the documentation in order to get a good understanding of the product.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher if the browser rate was more reliable. 

We use this solution to provide insight into how the UI is performing.

We appreciate the way that this solution allows us to monitor the ongoing status of the UI at any given time.

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.

We would also like the solution to increase the details that are provided when there are system abnormalities.

We have been using this solution for three years.

We have found this to be an overall stable solution.

We have found the cloud-based version of this product to be scalable.

We use an in-house support team for this solution. They are our first-line contact point to resolve any issues that arise on a day-to-day basis.

Positive

We were previously using a different, comparable solution. However, we decided to switch to this product as it provided lower response times.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We have both the mobile and web applications which use the APIs in the back end. The New Relic Browser also monitors all our review servers and has mobile and browser compatibility. Most of our stakeholders view the data on mobile and don't need to open their laptops.

Stakeholders can install New Relic on a mobile device, whether iOS or Android and monitor the enrolment. It is more compatible with the mobile device, but we can view it on the web browser, and the same features are supported for both. In addition, stakeholders can access the system 24-7 and can monitor it from anywhere, anytime.

We can view the system in one view, showing the utilization and server activity. It lets us tell if our server utilization is high, conduct a memories review, and view it in one dashboard.

The solution only supports the cloud platform and not on-premises. Therefore, they should assess supporting the licensing on-premises as well.

Stability is good, and we had no challenges while accessing the New Relic system from the browser.

Scalability is good, and there are no limitations. Once we add our users to our account, they can access it anywhere in the browser. We have never experienced any technical problems.

We have more than 30 users that are already configured in our system. The pricing depends on the number of users we have, and we currently have only about five or ten active users out of the 30. Only our operations team typically accesses the browser.

We have four to five people who maintain and manage the day-to-day operations. They have other tasks at the company and are not dedicated solely to the maintenance of this solution. They monitor how the servers are performing and get alerts to their emails.

New Relic technical support is good whenever we raise a ticket. They reply and provide knowledge sharing for new features. For example, before the COVID-19 pandemic, they would come into our office and share knowledge with all the operational and delivery teams and others using the New Relic system. Their support and contributions are good whenever we need them.

The initial setup was straightforward and didn't require much work on the browser configuration. The user administration is also good if there is an existing New Relic account. It allows the restriction of privileges and control of users accessing complete information. In addition, it provides for a bucket of developers, stakeholders and operations and restrictions of certain access to view dashboards or features.

Browser implementation is also simple when an account and servers are added to the New Relic system. Those servers are automatically reflected on the New Relic account, and we don't need to do much. It is straightforward, and once we configure the agent, all our servers are under our account.

The pricing is a bit high, but the features are very good. It costs about 1500 per month, but historical information was something we had to buy at an additional cost. Other than that, the rest of the capabilities and features are bundled in one package.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten. We have never faced any issues with this solution, and we are not worried about the technical capability. If we have a team that understands the system and the new capabilities, it can be used effectively.