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 recently purchased the Splunk SAM module and are exploring whether it is worth integrating the ITSM module. We are deciding if we can have a proper platform or if we should go with features that New Relic offers.

The synthetics, alerts, and native inbuilt capabilities for monitoring the cloud with the New Relic agents have been helpful.

We had some issues with the New Relic platform showing the sample traces because we want the entire traces to be listed as we are capturing some end-to-end metrics. So we thought it was not just the sample data we needed but the details of every transaction that goes through to the application. The New Relic team is helping fix this, and they have an option we are using in the meantime.

The thing missing from these platforms is connectivity. All the solutions work well with the cloud solutions, but the connectivity between legacy and newer cloud applications is not great. In addition, none of these tools can do end-to-end traceability across the different applications.

We have been using this solution for about four years.

It is a stable solution.

Regarding scalability, we recently extended our contract with New Relic for the next two years.

Regarding support, I think they have a pretty good support team. We have a current issue, and their technical team is on it. They're re-platforming, and there are a lot of alerting modules, so they advised of a bug. We hadn't faced an issue in four years where an existing functionality broke, and this was the first time. They're supporting us around the clock to get it fixed. The support team is also open to feedback. For example, we were building automation solutions and recommended that New Relic have native integration with AWS, so they added an event bridge integration with the AWS platform. So the alerting triggered from New Relic can be sent as an event to the AWS so we can complete our ops, like self-remediation and auto-healing. It's the feedback we provided that supported them in building the product that we needed.

We were using Dynatrace before, and then we switched to New Relic.

We got professional services from New Relic to help with the setup, and they were very helpful. In 2018, we went with their professional services, and their pricing was better at the time and comparatively lower than Dynatrace's. We were shelling out almost a million dollars per year for Dynatrace, but we saved some money once we moved to New Relic. Their professional services were about 60K when we used their support. I recently moved to a new team after a long time, and we have weekly connects with the New Relic team, and there has been a complete restructuring of the teams. So previously, the professional services were topnotch, but it is not as good now.

We feel it's a little bit pricey compared to Splunk. We haven't explored Dynatrace because we have invested so much in New Relic. New Relic changed its pricing model. Initially, we planned to put it into all the systems, but with all the pricing and strategy, we decided to refrain from monitoring. It costs about 600k to 700K per year.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Regarding advice, compared to Dynatrace, Dynatrace is adopting a lot more than New Relic. The problem is we are invested so much in New Relic. We are still trying to decide if New Relic is good for our company or if we should move to Dynatrace or SignalFx. I am not the best person to make that conclusion.

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. 

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. 

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.