New Relic Reviews

We do have a couple of applications for one of our customers. We are involved in performance testing and engineering of those applications. We use New Relic in multiple areas. It's used to monitor infrastructure in this use case. We capture the metrics around the utilizations on the infrastructure. 

We do also identify bottlenecks of the services or the calls, which are causing high response times. 

Those are two key areas where we have been using New Relic. We have been able to identify calls that are causing a lot of performance issues in the overall application, and then that, in turn, helps us to see what can be tuned to bring the performance to a better state.

It's a build-down feature, so you have the option to drill down when a call is being received. It further drills down the method level and shows which particular method or hit is actually causing the performance issue.

It's a common feature for all APM tools. That is the key benefit of any APM tool - it helps you to understand and get to the bottom of the issue or the root cause at the earliest possible time.

The solution offers good documentation. 

It's pretty easy to set up.

Real-user monitoring would be helpful as it would help me to really understand the client-side performance of the application. Maybe for whatever reason, we have not got to explore a similar kind of feature in New Relic.

I've been working with the solution for a year.

The stability is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable. The deployment is not done by us; however, when we have to add new services or new components, it is pretty easy. The turnaround is also pretty quick.

Our team just accesses the client's New Relic tool. It's typically just used by performance testers and engineers. It also sometimes gets used by architects as well the development team. From our side, we have three people working on the solution. 

While my understanding is they do provide technical support, I've never needed to reach out to them. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be. 

I'm more familiar with the likes of Dynatrace, AppDynamics, and New Relic.

We are just getting into a scenario where we might end up using AppDynamics. Otherwise, I haven't used anything before New Relic in a similar way.

From a documentation standpoint, it is pretty straightforward to set up New Relic assets. The infrastructure isn't that complex. To be honest, we haven't been involved in setting it up from an infrastructure setup standpoint. We have more consumers from which we use a setup that has been done to identify bottlenecks.

There's no specific maintenance that's been required unless they've changed endpoints which would need to be configured. It is something that's natural. When we do changes to the application and change endpoints, we'll have to configure the right endpoint. Otherwise, from a maintenance standpoint, given it's cloud and it's a storage medium, it doesn't need any major maintenance activity.

The customer tends to handle the deployment process.

I've done some research, more towards trying to understand various features. The customer, however, decides what tool to use. I don't really have the authority to compare anything and make suggestions. 

That said, when it comes to New Relic against AppDynamics against Dynatrace, or for that matter, Datadog, there are a few which have a higher price and provide richer UI. We did not really end up seeing a very major difference except in terms of monitoring.

We are likely working with the latest version of the solution.

The product has been pretty easy, and it is quite user-friendly in terms of trying to understand it. New Relic looks more at observability as a key factor. With it, you have front-end observability and back-end observability. My suggestion to others would be to go over them and also see if they can look at getting the documentation that's available to explore New Relic and then start with it that way so that it's easier for them to get started.

The other part is once they are used to New Relic, they can also look into a bootcamp that's run by New Relic, or a workshop. If they could attend it and then go into New Relic, that would be easier. They do have certifications as well which would also validate the knowledge that they gain on New Relic. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use this solution to provide insight into how the UI is performing.

We appreciate the way that this solution allows us to monitor the ongoing status of the UI at any given time.

We would like a dashboard feature to be created for this product.  This would allow us to monitor both the front and back-end of our UIs performance, and then report on it.

We would also like the solution to increase the details that are provided when there are system abnormalities.

We have been using this solution for three years.

We have found this to be an overall stable solution.

We have found the cloud-based version of this product to be scalable.

We use an in-house support team for this solution. They are our first-line contact point to resolve any issues that arise on a day-to-day basis.

Positive

We were previously using a different, comparable solution. However, we decided to switch to this product as it provided lower response times.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use the Synthetics component to evaluate load balancing and monitor the average throughput of data on the system.

The most valuable features are infrastructure monitoring and application performance monitoring (APM).

We are developing alerts and methods using the New Relic Query Language (NRQL).

The licensing cost is a little high and it should be brought down.

It would help customers if there were an on-premises version available.

I have been using the New Relic Browser for five or six months.

We have had no issues with respect to stability.

Scalability has not been a problem.

We have not needed to contact technical support.

I am using Dynatrace at the same time and I don't see much difference between the tools in terms of setup. In terms of usability, Dynatrace makes it easier to get the information that I want.

It is really easy to onboard a new application with New Relic. There are a couple of things to be installed and configured. Overall, it is simple and straightforward and I don't see much of a challenge.

We have an in-house technical team for implementation and deployment.

This is an expensive product.

This is a solution that I definitely recommend. If you want to keep monitoring your site and find the performance of it, this is a good option to do so. 

I would rate this solution and eight out of ten.

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.

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. 

The APM is great.

The solution can scale well. 

We've found support to be helpful.

It has a simple initial setup. 

The browser isn't exactly reliable. 

There are dashboard issues that need to be dealt with. 

There's no proper management of roles and divisions. For example, let's say if I create a dashboard and I want to give access only to a set of people and not to the other set of people, I can't do that, and that's where it has a lot of problems. If I develop a dashboard for myself, everyone else has an access to it. There's no proper access management. You just add someone to the platform, he gets access to all the dashboards. Yet there should be proper division of people who need to have access to a certain dashboard. 

I've been using the solution for three years.

While the APM is stable, the browser itself isn't too reliable. 

It's a scalable, reliable solution. 

We have 30 to 40 people working on the solution generally.

The technical support is quite good.

Positive

The solution is very simple to set up. I'd rate the entire implementation and deployment experience a five out of five. 

I've not witnessed any ROI. That's beyond my scope. 

I'm not aware of the exact licensing cost. The contracts are handled at an organizational level. 

We have a partnership with New Relic.

I'd advise potential new users to go through the docs first. They have very good documentation. Anybody who's going to start should first start with reading the documentation in order to get a good understanding of the product.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher if the browser rate was more reliable. 

We have both the mobile and web applications which use the APIs in the back end. The New Relic Browser also monitors all our review servers and has mobile and browser compatibility. Most of our stakeholders view the data on mobile and don't need to open their laptops.

Stakeholders can install New Relic on a mobile device, whether iOS or Android and monitor the enrolment. It is more compatible with the mobile device, but we can view it on the web browser, and the same features are supported for both. In addition, stakeholders can access the system 24-7 and can monitor it from anywhere, anytime.

We can view the system in one view, showing the utilization and server activity. It lets us tell if our server utilization is high, conduct a memories review, and view it in one dashboard.

The solution only supports the cloud platform and not on-premises. Therefore, they should assess supporting the licensing on-premises as well.

Stability is good, and we had no challenges while accessing the New Relic system from the browser.

Scalability is good, and there are no limitations. Once we add our users to our account, they can access it anywhere in the browser. We have never experienced any technical problems.

We have more than 30 users that are already configured in our system. The pricing depends on the number of users we have, and we currently have only about five or ten active users out of the 30. Only our operations team typically accesses the browser.

We have four to five people who maintain and manage the day-to-day operations. They have other tasks at the company and are not dedicated solely to the maintenance of this solution. They monitor how the servers are performing and get alerts to their emails.

New Relic technical support is good whenever we raise a ticket. They reply and provide knowledge sharing for new features. For example, before the COVID-19 pandemic, they would come into our office and share knowledge with all the operational and delivery teams and others using the New Relic system. Their support and contributions are good whenever we need them.

The initial setup was straightforward and didn't require much work on the browser configuration. The user administration is also good if there is an existing New Relic account. It allows the restriction of privileges and control of users accessing complete information. In addition, it provides for a bucket of developers, stakeholders and operations and restrictions of certain access to view dashboards or features.

Browser implementation is also simple when an account and servers are added to the New Relic system. Those servers are automatically reflected on the New Relic account, and we don't need to do much. It is straightforward, and once we configure the agent, all our servers are under our account.

The pricing is a bit high, but the features are very good. It costs about 1500 per month, but historical information was something we had to buy at an additional cost. Other than that, the rest of the capabilities and features are bundled in one package.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten. We have never faced any issues with this solution, and we are not worried about the technical capability. If we have a team that understands the system and the new capabilities, it can be used effectively.