New Relic Reviews

Our main focus is APM-related functionality, so we were looking for a convenient way to get all the details, as some of them are missing from New Relic and Grafana. Currently, we are working with Site24x7, where we are getting the information we are looking for in our comfort zone.

We used the Docker container as the agent in our server, which was split into one agent to collect the client's logs and metrics to see the web vitals, and another metric to collect the server metrics and APM-related traces.

The main benefit we found was the Error Inbox, and having all features available at a single point was very useful for us. The API functionality allows us to get hit counts from external sources, such as APIs or databases, and everything is mapped very clearly. We can overview which components are experiencing response delays, which ones are getting correct responses, and identify any unknown external APIs inside the application. We can investigate why we are getting 400 responses and similar issues.

I reviewed another observability tool, DataDog, and we moved away from New Relic because the pricing was not convenient and didn't fit our budget. With DataDog, some of the APM features we were looking for were not available, so we discontinued using both solutions.

Grafana is helpful, but it requires significant work in adding agents and configuring applications and server metrics. We implemented open-source Grafana, which wasn't convenient regarding APM, and most of the logs and traces related to APM were not what we needed, so we moved to Site24x7.

The Grafana Open Source implementation was done through their vendor. While they provided certain features, when compared to Grafana Cloud, the customized Open Source version wasn't really convenient for us. The only helpful aspect was that we could get server metrics on Grafana Open Source from our servers.

I have been working with New Relic for approximately six months.

New Relic was stable enough, and there were no downtimes or issues.

New Relic offers 400 GB per month free, but that quota was completely used within two weeks for a single server. We have substantial data in our server as our company is a trading financial company. For a single server, it takes around one and a half to two weeks to reach the limit. Additionally, we need to store logs for over five years based on SEBI regulations.

I didn't seek any support help from New Relic, but when I tried to get information regarding the plans, the response was delayed for a week. Other than that, everything was fine.

Positive

We reviewed Grafana and moved to another observability tool. We also evaluated DataDog, but we ultimately moved away from New Relic because the pricing wasn't convenient and didn't fit our budget. We are now using Site24x7 in production.

Implementing the New Relic agent is quite simple, and we were very comfortable with New Relic overall. However, it wasn't convenient based on our budget, which is why we discontinued using it.

The Grafana Open Source implementation wasn't done by ourselves; we worked with their vendor. They explained the features available in Grafana Open Source, and we implemented those solutions. However, compared to Grafana Cloud, the customized Open Source version wasn't really convenient for us.

The Error Inbox and consolidated features at a single point were very useful features. We could get hit counts from external sources, APIs, and databases, with clear mapping of all components. We could monitor response delays, correct responses, and identify unknown external APIs within the application.

We also reviewed DataDog as an observability tool, but we moved away from New Relic due to pricing concerns that didn't fit our budget. With DataDog, some of the APM features we were seeking weren't available, so we discontinued using both solutions.

We had everything in hand with New Relic initially. However, the pricing wasn't convenient for us, so we had to step back from using it.

I primarily focused on the data we were getting from New Relic, without exploring custom dashboards and other features. We were mainly focusing on the metrics and logs needed to trace our applications effectively.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate New Relic an eight. It's overwhelming from my point of view, and we needed to do some organizing in our New Relic account based on our preferences.

In my day-to-day activity, I check the configurations of the pod, for example, the CPU or memory utilization of the pods that are deployed in the Kubernetes cluster, by going to New Relic and checking the CPU and memory utilization. When I want to check the application logs, I use New Relic for checking the logs.

Using New Relic, we are able to monitor the cluster. In each namespace, we can see what pods are deployed, what the deployment sets are, and every other resource that is deployed in Kubernetes, which we can monitor using New Relic.

Recently we have implemented cost optimization in each and every environment. We pulled down all the CPU and RAM utilization of the pods, and later we came to know that the majority of the resources that are deployed are over-provisioned. We took those metrics and scaled down a couple of resources for the pods.

We were able to save $1,000 per month.

The resources that are created on the Kubernetes cluster can be seen on the dashboards in New Relic dashboard, which is the best feature.

If I want to make any customization, for example, if I want to see the last six months' CPU and RAM utilization of the pod, I can create a custom dashboard and check the utilization.

By using New Relic, I can check quickly the utilization of the CPU and memory of the Kubernetes nodes and the pods.

The logs in New Relic are not showing the full logs. When I go and check the logs, they are not complete. There are some missing things in the logs, and if that can be added, that would be very good.

If someone can provide the official documentation on how to update New Relic and in case I want to increase anything, those features and documentation would be very good.

From the past three years, I have been using New Relic tool, which is used for monitoring purposes. For example, if I want to check what the CPU or memory utilization is of a particular pod, I go and check in New Relic. If there are any logs, I go and check the application logs in New Relic.

New Relic is stable.

New Relic has handled changes in the environment very well.

In case I lose any access or something, there is customer support available for me. If I drop an email to them, they will respond quickly to my email.

We were using Sumo Logic for the logs. Later, the management decided to move from Sumo Logic to New Relic.

We did not evaluate other options.

I would suggest using the dashboards in New Relic for resource utilization of Kubernetes deployments, pods, or nodes. I have rated this product an 8.

My main use case for New Relic is health monitoring and log assembly. When a site goes down, I have to look at the logs if a series of sites get down or are technically down for any failure at all. I have to make comparisons between logs on each and every server.

In my opinion, the best feature New Relic offers is synthetic monitoring. What I appreciate most about synthetic monitoring in New Relic is that it is actually plug and play; it detects if there are several components of a website that are either failing or not communicating, and it gives a thorough log of what is actually happening.

I believe the metrics for the entire project in New Relic are very useful, as I do not have to add an add-on; everything is already included by default.

New Relic has positively impacted my organization by providing peace of mind to my clients, and it also gives a lot of insight to their marketing department on how users interact with their websites or how they work with them.

If New Relic could add a partnership with Cloudflare or any other vendor that can provide security on the edge, it would be even better because combining both technologies would be easier for the user or the client to have peace of mind by having the monitoring metrics along with any incident that may be happening. Therefore, you could have a more insightful and cohesive reason on why a site was either down or was attacked, allowing you to check only the logs in a certain time frame that aligns between the incident and the metric.

In terms of usability, I think the UI is acceptable, but it does not really guide you along with what you actually need. Additionally, regarding the reasons why a site is down, they do not generally give a good or wide insight into what exactly is happening, only some sort of idea of what it is, but not exactly what happened.

I have been using New Relic for three years.

New Relic is very stable.

I cannot form an opinion about New Relic's scalability, but I am quite sure that the scalability is efficient as far as our needs go.

Customer support for New Relic is impressive; they respond in less than five minutes. I would rate the customer support a ten on a scale of one to ten.

Positive

I have not previously used a different solution.

My advice to others looking into using New Relic is to trust only what New Relic can offer and not try to extend it to things it cannot do. For the price and for the services it offers, I think it is a pretty good package; there is room for add-ons, not improvement, as I believe New Relic is good for what it is but could use some additional features.

Before choosing New Relic, I evaluated CloudWatch, but the vendor insisted on using New Relic.

I appreciate that New Relic integrates with almost every single DevOps tool that I have. It is very easy to add it as a plugin for each agile process that we have for preparing any given task.

New Relic is a pretty good tool for what it is, which is monitoring and also providing insight metrics on the websites that it is added to. If New Relic could address security on the edge and if I missed it, then they should promote that more, as it would help the project significantly. I rate this review an eight overall.

It is for APM,  Application Performance Monitoring. And server monitoring.

There are two types of teams we have in every organization. One is for DevOps, and the second one is for performance testing. Those who are using these tools, like AppDynamics, Dynatrace, or whatever tool we have on the APM side. 

These tools are used by two teams: one is the performance team, and another one is the DevOps team. So, the setup and the alert system belong to the DevOps team, not for performance. So, I don't use any alerts in AppDynamics, Dynatrace, or any of the tools. 

There is room for improvement in the stability.

I have experience with this product. 

I would rate the stability a six out of ten. It can be improved.

Scalability is not that much available with the applications.

There are around 400 to 500 end users. 

Whenever it is needed, they have provided support from the New Relic side.

Whenever they get their customers, they'll go for approval, then they will assign someone, then that person will come and understand what issue we are facing and what we require. Then they will try to resolve the issue.

I prefer AppDynamics and Dynatrace. These two tools over New Relic.

So, integration is possible with LoadRunner and other tools in New Relic.

I would rate it a six out of ten. 

I use New Relic for the creation of dashboards, alerts, and any type of observability resources that are relevant for my company.

The most valuable features of New Relic are the ease of creating dashboards and its integration capabilities with many external tools. It enhances operational response by providing analytics and alerts that help us address issues quicker. 

Using New Relic speeds up troubleshooting and resolution, giving us a clearer picture of where issues are, thus saving time and effort.

Email alert customization is limited; it cannot be tailored much, which makes the system more rigid than optimal. The handling of logs from integration tools is not as advanced compared to other tools. AI integration, including predictive analytics, is available for certain features but is not comprehensive.

I have been using New Relic for one year.

I find New Relic to be a stable tool. It is reliable in the aspects that I use.

While responsive, customer service does not always provide straightforward solutions immediately. Issues that could be solved quickly sometimes take longer because they go around in circles. However, they are helpful when direct interaction is initiated.

Neutral

The setup is easy for the part I'm responsible for. However, since I do not manage the complete product setup, I cannot comment on the entire process.

For our part, New Relic has provided value by speeding up issue troubleshooting and resolution, allowing for more efficient use of time.

I rate New Relic seven out of ten. 

For those looking to use New Relic, it is more suited for networking and infrastructure monitoring rather than application performance monitoring, integration, or API log handling.

It is used to monitor applications, error logs, and Azure Kubernetes. We have used this as a self-hosted service in Kubernetes. We are not using it as an agent-based service. We self-hosted this New Relic on Kubernetes and maintained it as a service.

It can be integrated with PagerDuty and ServiceNow, which can auto-generate alerts and incidents and assign them to the concerned team. The dashboards can also be customized. We can also check the trends over the past year or so.

It helps prevent issues but does not cause losses. The error messages and deep insights may help us find the root cause and resolve the issue.

It could be bit better. We are looking at sorting the error loss by date, keyword, or something similar and grouping the logs with some keywords, like error.

I have been using New Relic for two years.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

I haven't got any issues, so I should get support from a New Relic technical team. We hosted this on our own, and even though this is a self-hosted service, we are managing it. 

The initial setup is simple. We are using the Relic Chart deployment on Kubernetes, but it can be done in an hour and should not take longer.

We just got a license for self-hosting and have set it up to do this.

Some add-ons have been integrated. You can integrate with New Relic to get deeper insights into the logs.

I have worked on two monitoring tools: New Relic and OpeRant. In addition, I used Azure Monitor. It's completely different, monitoring only the infrastructure, not the applications. We need to know application insights about querying and everything, but it's more user-friendly.

Overall, I rate an eight out of ten.

A typical use case with New Relic, it’s an APM tool. We basically put the agent in, the agent discovers, and then we feed it onto predefined monitors with a controlled baseline. That baseline will then feed the problems that New Relic is detecting into PagerDuty. PagerDuty is our incident management tool. PagerDuty has something called Event Orchestration.

The incident that comes down from New Relic has a payload. We look at the payload, the attributes, and define rules in Event Orchestration. Let’s say the team wants to implement suppressions on alerts, some mutations, delays. They want to actually cross-engage a different team. So there are a lot of use cases that come about once we get the incident into PagerDuty from New Relic. New Relic obviously has the conditional baseline, which can be adjusted as we go along. So, that’s basically a staple activity that we perform with New Relic. Among other advanced use cases, which will take me a bit to explain here.

It’s like any other APM tool. One of the most outstanding features of any APM tool is the anomaly detection part. If there is logic that is going to detect the anomaly, with a predefined baseline that the system will produce over a period of time, for instance, a week, then keep adjusting it as you go along. That is one of the most useful cases of any APM tool that I feel.

One of the things that our enterprise actually had a challenge with was the licensing structure for New Relic. I remember there are two things that I feel are different in New Relic from Dynatrace. You have a user model version, and you wanted your clients to be on user model version two. But that’s not easy. You have to build that user structure from scratch. That was one of the downers we felt in Nutanix. And the other thing was the licensing.

The licensing structure was slightly different from Dynatrace. Dynatrace gave us a better deal, to be honest. Apart from that, I don’t feel they’re two different tools. These are the same tools.

I have been using it for about four years. 

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. It is stable. Everyone uses SaaS platform. It never went out. There was no unplanned outage, at least that I experienced, apart from the regular maintenance windows or predefined windows by the vendor itself. 

So, it has been stable product.

It’s easily scalable because you deploy your agent. Our enterprise used to have a starter kit. The starter kit was basically an initialization of deploying the agents against our OpenShift. We had Kubernetes running under OpenShift. So there was a starter kit that deployed it. I didn’t feel anything really difficult with the implementation of the starter kit. So it was pretty okay.

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten because nothing is perfect.

We regularly used to meet with the success manager, and there were technical people as well. We had at least once a month office hours with them. And then on an ad hoc basis, if we needed them, we used to engage them.

Positive

I have used Dyntrace, GCP and Prometheus. Dynatrace has a little bit more edge, not from the product technicality point of view, but purely from the way I think the licensing scheme is modeled. The product behaves a little more easily compared to New Relic.

The initial setup is easy and straightforward. 

Dynatrace is a little more complicated than New Relic, but New Relic was easier to deal with.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy and one being difficult. It is not that difficult to setup.

The licensing model was more expensive compared to competitors because of the way they were defining their user structure; there was full-stack observability and less than full-stack observability. 

There’s no advantage to having anything less than full stack observability because once you get people on board with an APM tool, they would like to know as much as possible about what the agent can discover. 

If the agent is able to discover and you’re not giving anybody full-stack observability, it’s like you’re treating your product like Lego. The more you buy, the more expensive it gets. If you want to make it into any bigger construction, you gotta pay more. So that was a downer.

Overall, I would rate it a seven out of ten because of the licensing issue. 

At this point, Dynatrace is doing better than New Relic.

My primary use case for this solution is to see the application's performance and alert the reiteration of any performance.

The feature I found most valuable is being able to design my queries. It's easy to design a query.

I would like for this solution to improve the automatic configurations of workloads and capabilities.

In the next release, I'd like to see a better pricing structure.

I have been using this solution for about six months.

My impression is that stability is pretty good. I would rate it an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

I would rate the scalability of this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

I would rate the technical support of this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

Positive

We have previously used a different solution, and we switched only because our current customer was already using it.

My impression is that the initial setup process is straightforward. The solution is SaaS so all it takes for deployment is just signing up for the service. Our model of deployment is the cloud.

We have seen the ROI.

I would rate the pricing of this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. We have a yearly license.

I would rate this solution as a whole a six, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

When it comes to other people looking into this solution, I would advise making sure that if you're running into communities, to know what it does before you start using it.