New Relic Reviews

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. 

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.

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. 

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. 

We use New Relic as an infrastructure management tool. 

The tool's most valuable features were APM and core reliability. We get alerts whenever an anomaly is detected. The solution is very friendly. 

The solution needs to have staging. 

New Relic is stable. 

My company has around ten users for the product. 

The tool has good support. They have big communities and forums apart from the tech support. 

New Relic's deployment was easy. They had good documentation. 

The solution is cheap, but prices can go up when users grow. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. 

Our use cases were varied. We had front-facing applications, message brokers, API gateways, legacy applications running on RPC, and platforms. We used New Relic for instrumentation, and we discovered different metrics using it.

New Relic is an APM tool, similar to Dynatrace or Datadog. It uses an agent to discover metrics based on browser, mobile, and custom matrices. We can also develop synthetic monitoring. It has helped us in exploring the metrics.

The best feature of New Relic is its simple look and feel, making it easier to use than other tools.

One thing New Relic needs to improve is the user data schema. It wanted us to move from version one to version two, but that was difficult because we wanted to do single sign-on, and it couldn't support our Ping Identity platform. That's something New Relic needs to work on.

Another issue I have with New Relic is its suite licenses. It has a two-tier system: the full-stack observability, which requires a suite license, and the free version, which doesn't offer any peer review capabilities. It needs to change because having a suite license for a user who can only view the post-stack, not even the curated view, is a big no-no. Dynatrace or SAP don't have this issue.

I should point out one more thing about New Relic. We use it with OpenShift, and one of the issues we faced was that New Relic required root access, which was a concern because no admin in the world would give any third-party vendor root access. However, they seem to have corrected this in the next version. 

I have been using New Relic for three years. We're using version 8.0.

It has its limitations, but it is a stable solution. 

It is a cloud-based solution, so the platforms automatically scale. 

We struggled with the support. 

We are currently using Dynatrace. We have moved away from New Relic because of its shortcomings – the user data schema. They had two versions, and we couldn't group different entities under version one. For example, our enterprise applications are numerous, including activation, OSS, BSS applications, and so forth.

It is an expensive solution. The licensing scheme is based on users having to have full stack observability, and there is no free version for non-seat license users to access what they want to see. I believe it's an expensive tool. They were not like that a couple of years back. Their new licensing scheme is based on full-stack capabilities; many clients would not like it. I would rate the licensing model a four out of ten. It is a very poor licensing scheme. 

It works well, and it has a very good look and feel to it. However, it also has its limitations. So some clients may like it. That's why they will be willing to pay more for New Relic compared to any other API. It's fine.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.