New Relic Reviews

The use case for this solution is the same as Azure Monitor. They have the same coverage for the use case. In the end, we switched to Azure Monitor.

It is for the application quality process and the live system support monitoring.

We like the performance of the product. It's very good, very reliable.

All features are all capable to responding to our requirements. There's no problem on this side. 

The solution can scale. 

The initial setup isn't a big deal. Our admins can handle it. 

The solution is quite expensive. 

We've been using the solution for about two years at this point. It hasn't been too long. 

It's stable. It is reliable. The performance has been good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable. It's not a problem to expand as necessary. 

We have two or three users on the product right now. 

Previously, we did not use other application performance management products.

We also use Azure Monitor. They are very much the same. However, we've since moved over to Azure Monitor.

It's not as straightforward a setup as Azure Monitor. Then again, we have admins, and they were managing that part. It's not a big deal.

We have two admins that can handle deployment and maintenance. 

The price is an issue. It's quite expensive.

That said, I can't speak to the exact pricing. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using and if it's the latest version or not. 

We'd recommend the product if budgeting is not a concern for a company.

I'd rate it nine out of ten. We were pretty happy with its capabilities. 

We use New Relic APM. We use New Relic synthetic monitors to monitor around 3,600 websites that we host for clients. We also use a scripted browser to automate some of the scripting browser tests that we run. The APM is there and we use basic monitoring with all the metrics, et cetera.

One of the best features is that New Relic only has a very straightforward pricing model. They only charge for the data that is ingested. All the features that they provide are completely free of cost. You can use any tool that they provide, and you just pay for the data that is ingested.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

It's stable.

New features are added often.

It's scalable. 

Technical support is helpful and adheres to the SLA.

Their pricing model, in terms of user management, is that you pay for every user. They don't have an opportunity to share the dashboard with the public. If you want to share it with stakeholders or people outside the organization who just want to have a look at a couple of metrics, you can't do that without onboarding them to the product itself.

I've been using the solution for more than three years. 

They often keep introducing new features. That said, as far as the stability of the product itself is concerned, it's a very stable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is scalable. We have a scalable infrastructure. Their API calls and everything help us scale the monitoring and the use of New Relic itself. We scale the solution according to our requirements.

The developers use it to test and look at the logs, and the SRE team uses it for reliability. 

We have another system admins team that reuses it for monitoring of services that are running. Even our stakeholders use it for various dashboards and look at the SLA reports and other stuff. The user base is not very large, yet we have different teams who use New Relic in different ways.

Technical support was very helpful. They are very prompt, and they reply within the SLA time limit. It's pretty good.

Positive

The product is pretty straightforward with every product that is out there - even with Datadog. New data integrations are seamless. The initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward.

I'm not sure how long the deployment takes. 

It's easy to maintain. We integrate it with our CI/CD pipeline, so any changes go through the same process. We don't have a dedicated team to maintain it.

The payment structure is great. Users are only charged for data ingested.

We spend somewhere around $5,000 to $6,000 per month with an annual recommitment of maybe $60,000. These are just ballpark figures. Licensing is handled by the finance team and the vendor management team.

While we do use this solution currently. we are still debating between various products out there.

We are end-users.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

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.

We use New Relic APM to monitor our public cloud-hosted application and infrastructure.

Not so far. Although, we haven't really got a very mature system of defining our application processes from end-to-end and certainly not our client-centric impact.

I'm reasonably satisfied. We haven't run the rule over it too much because it hasn't been a massive investment.

It has been quite valuable to demonstrate how we can change our views for our services due to their service. It has proved value so far.

We don't have any problems with this solution.

The configuration isn't terrible when compared with other products.

It does everything we wanted it to do. We haven't been too critical in our thinking about where it can improve.

There really is nothing that stands out with New Relic. With the insight, I think it will be found lacking for its report aggregation capabilities. How granular I could go down at looking at certain data, especially related to the operations, is limited.

The API integrations that they have for us to automate our configuration was fine, but I think for some of these tools, it was over-engineering for us to try and automate any of that. So, we just use the user interfaces.

I have been using New Relic APM for approximately two months.

We are using the latest version.

It's a stable solution. We have not encountered any issues. We're not plugging too much traffic into it. We're not reporting on it heavily. It's not feeding into our service management processes heavily. So we haven't seen anything.

We have not yet explored the scalability, it's too early for us.

There are approximately 15 of us using it altogether. We are called infrastructure engineers, who are third line infrastructure support and architecture people. 

Some of the lead developers have access, but there are 15 of us and we are all pretty similar.

We have not contacted technical support.

We have two custom in-house processes that do our application data flow monitoring. We have manually and in a custom nature, built out a performance monitoring platform in Splunk using our knowledge of the system over the years.

I have used App Dynamics in the past with another company. There really is nothing that stands out with New Relic. It is similar to AppDynamics and Dynatrace.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

I don't think any of these tools are tools that anyone can pick up and install. 

I wouldn't say it was any more difficult to configure than some of the other solutions. It is definitely not more difficult to configure than AppDynamics. 

The price was one of the reasons we chose this solution. It's reasonably priced. It's cheaper than the likes of AppDynamics and Dynatrace, based on how our subscription is.

We looked at Datadog initially and found the initial setup to be far more complex than what we found in New Relic. 

Our proof of concept has been successful.

Getting an order in and reporting is an industry in itself, don't think it can solve the problems it's not trying to solve. It is an application performance monitoring tool. Don't try and make it anything else.

The big problem with Splunk for us is that it can do everything. The thing that's nice about New Relic is it doesn't try and do everything, it does what it does. So far, it does it to satisfaction, but don't try and fill multiple holes in your toolchain with it. It's good at what it does.

We had some pretty informed opinions on what it was going to do. We knew where it wanted us to get, and so far it has cost the amount we wanted it to cost and done everything that we wanted it to do.

I would rate New Relic APM a ten out of ten.

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.

The New Relic APM basically helps us understand how the application is functioning at a very in-depth level. The APM helps us bring in observability, which is the next part of monitoring. It tells us about every database query, long-running query, website response time, page load times, and everything in very good detail that normal, basic monitoring cannot provide. APM is really important to every organization out there.

It brings value in three places. One is code detection and resolution. You can pinpoint and identify where the issue lies within the application. 

The second thing is performance monitoring, which actually gives you performance in terms of actual signs. When a user logs into a particular website, what kind of performance that user actually sees, we can see that as well.

It also gives metrics. All that session data as well we get helps us come to know if a user was frustrated when using the site or if they were happy, or what the emotion was.

The solution offers good code detection and resolution.

It offers helpful user metrics so we can learn more about the user experience. 

It has good performance monitoring. 

One thing that Data Dog provides, which is the RUM, Real User Monitoring, is something that could be useful in this solution. Data Dog captures the entire session and then provides it as a video player path, which gives more insight into what the user was doing. It's pretty impressive. New Relic does that, yet it only captures using a couple of screenshots, which is not very detailed since you are unable to see the entire user flow. That is one thing that New Relic can actually improve upon.

We have a few different teams on the solution right now, including an admins team, and an SRI team, and they depend on this solution very much.

I'm also familiar with Datadog, which offers excellent RUM in comparison to New Relic. 

I don't have any details in relation to ROI at this time. 

The solution is around $5,000 to $6,000. Everything is included. We only pay for the data that is ingested. You can use all the features and the APM and not have to pay extra. YOu just pay for what you use. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use the solution in my company for predominantly API response time. It is used to measure API response time.

New Relic is very slow, and the app is a bit frustrating to use, which is something that has been happening a lot in the past year. During the last six months, I have noticed that it has become extremely laggy. The irony stems from the fact that a tool used for performance measurement itself has so many performance issues. I think it has also become too crowded with too many features. I have been using New Relic for ten years, and over a period of time, it has added a lot of new tools and new profiles, which are great, but now the tool has become too crowded. Around 80 percent of the time, I use the tool only for basic use cases, which were all there even ten years ago. The tool has definitely improved the interface, which is good, but apart from the basic features that I need, there are all these features in the tool that crowd the tool's entire user interface, which becomes complex. I like Sentry because its main interface for error reporting and handling has always been very clean and focused while not being crowded with too many things, but I don't know about the solution's future. With New Relic, the tool seems crowded when it comes to its interface, which has too many features.

I have been using New Relic for ten years. I use the solution as an end customer.

It is a scalable solution. The product operates as a third-party or SaaS tool, so I believe that it has intra-scalability options.

The technical support for the solution is very good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

My company has been using Sentry for error reporting, alerting, and monitoring.

The product's initial setup phase was very easy.

One person can manage the product's deployment phase. Once the product is installed, it doesn't require much maintenance.

The solution is deployed on a cloud-based infrastructure.

The solution can be deployed in less than a day.

I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one means cheap, and ten means very expensive. I don't remember the product's exact price, but I know my company pays around 500 USD a month for two or three products.

For monitoring purposes, I would say that the product has a good interface for quickly finding performance bottlenecks.

The tool gives a detailed audit of every piece of code, like how much percentage of time it takes, making it very easy for me to first locate the APIs that offer the poorest performance and then go deep dive into those APIs to see which part of the code base of that API is causing performance bottlenecks. Instrumentation becomes quite straightforward and easy with the tool's features.

I don't use the alerting system in New Relic.

My company uses New Relic only when we want to instrument APIs and for performance improvements, but we don't use it for error handling and error reporting since we prefer Sentry for such areas.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

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.