New Relic Reviews

We use it for application performance monitoring. It helps us to track down the bottlenecks in the application, whether it is in the database or the front-end. It is helpful for our developers when they are tracking down issues.

We are concerned about our application's print and load times. It should be faster for the end user's experience. New Relic has helped us in terms of the optimizing our print and loading times.

It has solved many of our performance issues.

The deep insights, which will give you the metrics (not a high level), so we can build out at the database level where the bottleneck is. This has been pretty helpful.

The stability is good. We haven't had any issues with New Relic. We load test for about 10,000 users accessing the application for every five minutes. This is our use case, and New Relic was used to monitor how the application is performing.

We use SaaS, so we don't really manage New Relic in any of the boxes.

The scalability is good, because it is already running on AWS.

We have not used technical support.

The integration and configuration of this product in our AWS environment was very easy.

We have plans to integrate with other products going forward.

It has saved on our developers' time when digging into performance issues.

The pricing model is a little confusing for beginners. They find it a little expensive, and if you are using it already, then that is not good.

Purchasing from the AWS Marketplace is very straightforward. When you buy it from AWS Marketplace, you can go with both options: URL SSL license and On Demand. So, when you are building, it is part of AWS, and this is convenient for end users.

We deploy everything on AWS. Purchasing the product on AWS Marketplace made it easier for us.

The pricing is okay comparatively their competitors. The only concern was whether it should be purchased on demand or bring your own license, and which way passes some savings onto the end customers.

We evaluated a couple of other vendors: AppDynamics and Datadog. They were quite a few other players as well, but we are happy with New Relic because it is simple to use and the developers can use it in their development.

Evaluate it, because it supports almost all the popular run times. Most of the popular languages support this, like Java. So, it makes it adaptable and easy to use.

I work predominantly on AWS.

Monitoring the health of our infrastructure.

It has given us better insight into the performance of the system, allowing us to prepare things, if necessary. It has been helpful to patch things before they are a problem.

We are able to drill down and see what is going on in the system.

The price needs improvement.

It is on our production workload, so we put a fair amount of stress on it. However, it is sort of self-contained. We do not really have to do much with it.

Size of the environment is 30 VMs which are instrumented with New Relic. 

I haven't had any scaling problems with it.

We receive technical support as part of our subscription.

The integration and configuration of the product into our AWS environment was extremely easy.

The pricing and licensing are too high.

We evaluated Dynatrace and a few others. These competitors did not provide as much in-depth information, but they were considered because they were far more cost-effective.

We went with New Relic because it was best of breed.

I would recommend to go with New Relic.

It integrated well with Docker. They have Lambda support now, so it has been fairly seamless.

I have only used the AWS version.

We are a web development agency, focused on Drupal CMS. As New Relic is already integrated with Drupal, we can get our projects done with best practice and with the best value that we believe in. New Relic provides deep analysis for data and server health so it lets us know of network bottlenecks before we deliver the project to enhance our product. Therefore, we can be sure that we deliver the best value for our customers.

In our experience, the Server Insights are valuable.

Some of our customers see New Relic as a promising product to have, and we would like to deliver it to them. The only way we would be able to do that would be if we had server appliance for clients that we could install in their data centres.

We had no issues with the performance.

It's been able to scale for our needs.

9/10

It was easy and we documented all the steps that we took to make it easy for everyone. You need to be a server admin of course to do it, but you don't need much experience to install and run New Relic.

We did it in-house, you just have to follow the documentation.

It would be nice if we could buy it annually instead of monthly.

We evaluated many products, and chose New Relic because of its deep integration with Drupal.

If you are using Drupal you should get New Relic. I would say that even if you don't use Drupal, you should get it. New Relic helps us to improve our team quality and to get our projects done with best practices. It will help you get to know everything about your infrastructure.

We use New Relic to generate log management, like the different kinds of logs and alarms, and automate the same easily.

The versatility of the solution is its most valuable feature. It offers features like user behavior and user experience monitoring besides log management in one suite. When comparing it with other tools, other tools are primarily focused on only the management or only user behavior, but New Relic has both features.

The initial setup can be made easier. Like Mixpanel, New Relic can also have a step-by-step guide for the setup process. It needs slight improvements to be made in the user experience.

I have been using New Relic for two to three months.

It is a stable solution. I rate it eight out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. I rate it eight out of ten.

The initial setup was simple, but it can be made easier. I rate it seven out of ten. I did not deploy it a hundred percent because I was testing it out. The solution was deployed on the cloud.

I will recommend the solution, especially for a large product. So that one can have complete monitoring from the front-end tool and back-end server side.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

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.

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'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.