New Relic Reviews

The primary use case is monitoring.

It gives insights to non-technical people about what technical issues are most important, how much it impacts customers, and potentially, where we should be targeting our development teams when they have time.

It has in-depth analysis using developer code for someone whose not traditionally a developer.

They could improve the education process and how people understand that these tools are very technical. I understand everything very quickly and where it all comes in because I grew up with the product, but right now if someone was to pick it up from day one, it is a very steep learning curve.

The monitoring is only as good as the alerts that it produces. By having it set up fine grain alerting, it is a bit of a pain. They already have all these other companies that use their system, so they should easily be able do alerts based on deviations that we don't need to program on a per instance or artifact basis.

It has been stable for all our work lines.

So far, I haven't hit any scaling issues with them, and the environments that I have come from have thousands of servers being monitored.

Their technical support has been pretty good.

It was quite hard to integrate, if you weren't technically skilled. 

A lot of people who consume this product may not be technically skilled, but if you are, it is easy to use. From this perspective, it is really good, but this is an important aspect as well.

This was recently implemented at the current place that I work. Previously, without a monitoring solution, a developer could potentially spend a day working on a feature or a bug to try and resolve and issue. Now, a lot of the times, with monitoring put in place, we can understand if a customer is actually hitting this bug, and how often they are hitting it, and how much frustration they are dealing with on a day-by-day basis, then reprioritize our tasks. It gives our developers that insight, or it gives less skilled engineers or less technical leads the ability to ramp up quickly on what that particular bug is, so we can easily scale out. So, the cost of solving that problem isn't just reliant on a tech lead understands the system or built the system. Anyone can find the issue, including associates, and the amount of time they spend debugging has been reduced by a lot.

They gave us aggressive discounts when they were brought in for the first time, but they have also kept them for the year-on-year renewals, which has been absolutely fine. Thus, we haven't looked to change.

The pricing and licensing are good if you have an account manager and a partner manager who are looking to help out. 

We also evaluated AppDynamics and Dynatrace. 

We chose New Relic because they have a slightly different pricing model. We were aggressively negotiating price, which means they gave us a pretty good price. Since then, they have continued upholding that same level of customer service, discounts, and partner level. So, it has been really nice working with them.

You definitely need this product if you want scale and stability.

It fulfills what it's designed to do. Their constant iteration of features means it will always keep us well-informed about that particular requirement about the software.

We are also using New Relic with PagerDuty and Slack. They integrate pretty seamlessly. A couple of button pushes, and it was done.

We are using the SaaS version.

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.

We use it for server monitoring and strictly for our EC2 instances.

It has helped us maintain a much higher uptime than we had previously.

It fulfills the need that we had for the product.

Server uptime is its most valuable feature.

We have had issues with our agents going offline.

The stability has been fine.

Our environment has 25 servers.

The help from the technical support has always been good.

We have to install an agent on each of our instances.

New Relic was the main product that we looked at.

If you are looking for this specific type of application to keep a record of your inventory, then it does exactly what it is supposed to do.

We use their cloud version of it.

• Mostly monitoring
• Analytics
• Troubleshooting
• PagerDuty

• It visualizes metrics well and tracks our incoming requests, providing a lot of detail which is useful for troubleshooting. 
• It can track cross-application, knowing when you go from one application to another, like a request stop. 
• It's very visually appealing and useful.

It is a one stop shop and integrates with PagerDuty seamlessly. The solution is pretty self-contained.

We would like to receive more AWS-specific details from the New Relic Dashboard, like EC2 health.

I haven't seen any problems with it.

Scalability is good. We are using it at an enterprise level and have 20 companies in our corporation.

It has a good presence on the Internet, in terms of support and community. Answers are out there and easy enough to find.

The AWS integration was seamless for us. It was implementing stuff that other people have done so many times before, and the team which headed it up knew what they were doing. From my understanding, there was very minimal configuration. Maybe there was more on the New Relic side, but as far as feeding it, it was pretty easy.

We were also looking at CloudWatch and a homegrown performance-type solution.

We chose New Relic because it is all-inclusive. It has everything right there.

I just starting using it, but the product is pretty impressive.

We are hosting it through AWS.

The primary use is for data application monitor, we used to add some backlogs into the application to see where the progress or the border makes in the process. So far, it is a good program.

I think it is the possibility to see the application flow, and gives us suggestions how to manage it. We have a mode we call "influx" where we can see statistics, traffic jams or other important information.

I think the APM mode can be improved. 

In addition, its difficult to have a predictive tool to see how the application would behave in the future when it basically only shows the historical data.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is very sclable.

We looked at Dynatrace. We analyzed the differences between New Relic and Dynatrace and we realized that New Relic was easier to implement and that our Miami office had experience to do so. They had already started using it there, in the Operations office. So, we went with New Relic.

In my opinion, New Relic is a good tool, and if a colleague was asking my opinion, I would say "Go ahead and use it!" It is a good solution.

We used it more heavily before Synthetics came, but it’s kind of like Synthetics, but used domestically.

It allows us to perform threshold testing to see how quickly transactions are getting out to customers, providing us with data such as response time and adequacy.

Our software does significant data queries, so we throttle performance according to region just to keep the application up. Now we can open it up completely because of New Relic tools.

Ability to quickly identify different browser usage performance issues across our application functions. Again saves time in coding to enhance the end user experience.

It enables us to fine-tune our application quicker. It's also better if we find issues in our application than if our customers find it.

It also prevents performance issues because we're able to see potential issues before they cause real problems.

I can't recommend any improvements to Browser. I really can’t find anything that I don’t like about these apps.

Deployment was very simple.

We've encountered no issues with stability.

Scaling has not been a problem.

I've not had to use technical support.

We had no problems setting it up.

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.

It helps us keep our customers happy, that’s the bottom line. When it responds the way they expect, they’re happy.

It shows us where the bottlenecks are in our code. It was great to reveal where our code was insufficient or needs to be refactored. The most important thing is that it tells us where the latency in throughput and response time are.

What we have we’re happy with, but we’re still evaluating.

Very stable. Never had any issues.

Very extensible. Support and QA can look at the parts they care about and that allows for feedback and communication across the teams. It’s been great for our support team.

Never had to contact them.

We knew that we were going to move into SaaS, and these are the kinds of tools we’re going to need to get there.

Very straightforward. In this day and age, that’s what you expect from a service like that. Being able to set my alerts and the thresholds for those alerts is very intuitive.

We look at what it produces – I don’t look at cost. We look at what you can get from the product. If it’s the right tool, it doesn’t matter what it costs because you’re going to get it back many-fold from your productivity.

New Relic was it. We looked at other things we could put together ourselves, but they weren’t the full package. Something like this is all-inclusive; it’s a one-step.

We look for their reputation, how many people are using the solution. When your peers talk about it, you know that’s something you should consider. Knowing also who their customers are and how long they’ve been around is important.

The ease of use, the information you can get out of it from the very little things you do – you get so much out of it. It’s very intuitive. You don’t have to read a manual – you just use it.