New Relic Reviews

We use it for application performance monitoring.

Its most valuable feature is application performance monitoring.

It gives me a complete x-ray of the application to understand where the bottlenecks are, then improve and fix issues.

We send through all our real-time transactions through it, and it is very stable. 

The scalability is very good. We have a large real-time environment for processing payments.

Their technical support is pretty good and responsive. We have a real good relationship with them.

The integration and configuration of New Relic was straightforward and easy.

It works well with the AWS platform that we are using. The integration with AWS was straightforward and easy.

We have seen ROI.

Comparatively, the pricing is expensive.

I zeroed in on New Relic. I was looking for a cloud native product at the time that I was looking for a solution, and two years ago, it was one of the leading products. It was quick to market, and we wanted to implement something quickly. It provided all the features which were required, and we didn't have to do our own installs within our data center.

Give it a shot. See if it meets your use case.

I have used the on-premise and AWS versions. The versions are very similar.

The ability to trace transactions all the way down to find where the software is broken - database, web services, etc., and all the way down, with the trace dumps, to see where our application is broken.

When our app passes critical threshold, can quickly go to Transactions and/or Database views and immediately see the code areas causing the issue. Saves so much time in debugging our code and environments.

I can have my developers find bugs and fix them in one-tenth of time they used to take. It enables the stability of our product, and it's allowed me to keep human resources at a minimum so that we have a smaller number of people to do better things.

In Alert History, while you can see the trending in response time by Request Queuing, .NER CLR and Database, if you had the ability to see which transaction type was the slowest during the timeframe when the critical error occurred by displaying the info within the same “tool tip” hover window which currently gives me the time per request and number of transactions, i.e., if it had the additional correlation information of “StatusCode/403” which you can get from the Events Errors hover. This has the potential of saving a lot of analysis time going back and forth between views.

We didn't have any deployment issues.

I haven’t had any issues with stability.

It’s scaled for us. We’re still relatively small with just 16 servers.

When my IT manager did the initial install, they were very responsive.

It was straightforward, but the issue was the unfamiliarity of our IT manager outside the Microsoft world.

If you want to save money, go for it. Time is money, and it saves you so much time to be able to find issues and to fix them.

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.

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. 

I use the product for monitoring many types of metrics, e.g., availability and comparing numbers in relation to products. I evaluate the response time of servers and the product to determine the health of the servers.

Sometimes, I monitor the user's time of response and use this information to improve the number of servers on the back-end. Or, I can use it to change my back log for front-end developers and improve their response times. It's very important in this case because I can improve the experience of the final user.

Time of response for back-end and front-end (user) requests.

There is a picture which goes to your browser and it monitors requests from other users. However, it's impossible to use now because the price is very high. The feature is very nice, but I tried it during the trial period, and the current price makes it impossible to use.

The infrastructure of New Relic is very stable, and it works well.

We are using AWS Cloud, and I integrated New Relic with our software, was very simple. It is easy to use the New Relic product, and it is not a hard connection between AWS Cloud and it.

The return of investment is very good.

New Relic browsers are very expensive.

I recommend using the free version of New Relic. If you like the free version and understand its importance for your company, you can move to the trial. Then, you can migrate to the paid version.

I have tried other competitors of New Relic, but the other competitors which I tried were not good. On the other hand, the competitors are cheaper than New Relic.

We chose New Relic because it has all the attributes which we are using to monitor the health of servers.

I use other type of software for database, e.g., MongoDB and GraphQL. It is easy to integrate New Relic with these third-party softwares. I don't spend more than one or two days for integration, as it's very fast. It can monitor our codes and third-party codes in these softwares.

It has the ability to simulate real-world testing outside of the US, emulating conditions outside the US with remote-access. The rest of world doesn’t have internet the way we do. Because we’re a cloud-based solution, it doesn’t perform consistently the same because of internet issues in other countries.

When our app passes critical threshold, can quickly go to Transactions and/or Database views and immediately see the code areas causing the issue. Saves so much time in debugging our code and environments.

Allows us to test and monitor performance for our international deployments in Asia and Central America throughout the release cycle.

It replicates testing, and we have a much higher level of functional and scripted testing across our application. We can execute test cases as they’re meant to be.

I honestly can't think of any areas for improvement. It's a complete solution that gets a 10/10 in my book. I really can’t find anything that I don’t like about these apps.

No issues with deployment at all.

We've encountered no issue with stability.

There have been no issues with scalability.

Once I had to file a support ticket which was resolved on the same day. It may have been a setup ticket for the kind of test we wanted to run.

We had no problems setting it up as it was very straightforward.

We didn't consider any other solution.

We've been able to automate a lot of our interactions with it. Also, it has the ability to monitor random URLs not tied to the one pinger per application (though it costs extra).

I think that there have been some questionable product enhancements. Over a year ago, New Relic rolled out a new navigation that really disrupted our workflow. It added many more clicks and was surprisingly frustrating. Luckily, that was mostly reverted, but more recently, around six months ago, they redesigned the error reporting page. This is another example of a tool that worked fine, but which is now very hard to use.

About six months to a year ago, we invested a lot of time automating a lot of our interactions with New Relic. However, their API couldn't do a lot of things, and even getting a list of errors was impossible without scrubbing every application/server manually and checking health conditions yourself. This seems very basic. While they have made a new API version, we've had difficulty with that as well. 

Additionally, I'm told that they will deprecate completely the old API, which now means I need to reimplement everything that was working in this new version.

It's been a stable product. We haven't had any issues with instability.

It's scaled for our needs. We haven't had any issues with scalability.

Cost is significant with a lot of extras. For instance, another big negative point is the inability to monitor random URLs not tied to the one pinger per application. They've added it which is great, but now it costs extra for using it in any real capacity.

The website is much more responsive because we are able to quickly pinpoint the worst pages – we can be really targeted with where we put our resources. In a lot of areas, one page takes one minute, the next can be ten, then some take one, some take 30 seconds. You have to decide at what point you want to focus, this allows us to find the pages that are really painful for users, and fix those and make them a lot better.

It’s absolutely the ability to get a really specific read of what is taking up time. For example, if a webpage takes two minutes to load it tells you why it’s taking so long.

They instrument up from the bottom to the top – every piece of code - they have a very perfect read of what’s being done, and how long it’s taking. And, a super nice way of presenting that.

It gives you amazing statistics, but doesn’t give you enough information about what to do with the statistics. The sales people need to be on board on this end.

There were no issues.

From a point of view of showing you what to do fine but in terms of showing you what to do with the data infuriatingly unhelpful. Very friendly and available however.

There was no solution in place previously.

We implemented in-house.

It was able to really effectively find the problem and solve it – it sped up the pages considerably.

The monthly cost os $1000 per server per month, but it could be even more. We pay about $250 for the server, and then New Relic wants over $1000 to give us statistics on those servers.

The alternative is to do UNIX profiling. Basically, you do it piecemeal, and amongst those piecemeal solutions is also browser profiling, and it’s really hard to justify. We thought about it, as if you’re a relatively small company New Relic is expensive, but it's way better than that. The price point is an issue so we turn it on and off when we need it. Not a great solution for a start-up.