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 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.

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.

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 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.

I use New Relic for monitoring and observing the entire environment. It offers end-to-end monitoring and observability to predict potential impacts in the coming weeks. For instance, it can detect if two endpoints start consuming more bandwidth than usual, thereby providing more insights about potential impacts on the environment.

New Relic helps us maintain and shape the environment from a network perspective by providing end-to-end monitoring and observability. It offers insights into normal and peak behaviors, alerts us to any issues, and assists with remediation plans.

The APM feature is highly valuable as it can record session hosts, usage, and diagnose customer behaviors. Additionally, we can simulate user actions to assess the user experience. The alerting capabilities are also efficient, sending emails and desktop notifications, and providing remediation options.

The pricing could be improved as it is quite high relative to what is offered. The cost versus performance efficiency could be better. Apart from that, I don't need any specific improvements to the features themselves.

I have been working with New Relic for over one and a half years.

New Relic is highly stable. I have never experienced an outage or any misbehavior with this solution.

New Relic offers high scalability. It is quite flexible and can scale according to our needs.

The technical support team for New Relic is good. I would rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

Before New Relic, we did not use any specific solution for observability. We used normal monitoring tools.

The initial setup of New Relic is super easy and straightforward. It involves proposing the solution to the client, activating administrative users, and customizing dashboards and alerts based on customer needs. Training and preparation made the process smooth and efficient.

The deployment typically requires two to three tier-one or tier-two team members from the technical team.

The pricing is relatively high. It can be quite costly compared to the performance efficiency, making it not very value for money, especially for smaller businesses.

We evaluated several other options like Datadog. However, after comparing prices and support, we chose New Relic.

Do not implement New Relic until you have identified your needs and ensured that it meets your specific requirements. Proper assessment and planning are crucial.

I'd rate the solution 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.