New Relic Reviews

The most valuable features to us are--

• Measuring performance from the applications point view against the view of the customer's browser,
• Being able to troubleshoot issues due to an app or network issue, and
• The error rate is helpful in finding issues in the server pool.

It helps us troubleshoot issues quicker, and when we're using it for performance analysis, several items can boil to the top. We can look at what's going on and what's slow and causing problems, instead of looking in general at which queries or operations are causing slowness.

I can't think of much to improve. We're very used to the way it looks and the traces. It's much better than it used to be, but perhaps the retention on some of the old problem traces would be an improvement. I think they run out after a relatively short amount of time and being able to look back and spot check some of them. If we have a problem today, it would be nice to look at back at the traces by, say, a week or a month even if there wasn't a problem then, so we can compare whether it's relatively slow or it suddenly become slow.

But I think the data layout is great as everything you need is at the top and we can able to drill down further and further to individual server,s or into the error rate and individual transactions.

The code is great. We don't have any issues, and I think that's the majority of New Relic customers. You have issues with your first customers, fix the issues, and then leave it alone until the next issue comes along.

Our track record is the same, we used it, troubleshot it, and then the developers fixed it.

I think we're finding more and more ways to use it. Because of plug-ins, we are pushing as much information in front of the app to the developers. I think too many companies end up with too many tools, but with New Relic, we want to keep in front of our developers all the time.

We've had to contact tech support several times, and each time they've been great. Their one-time survey call is good.

We've been using AppDynamics alongside New Relic. We had issues finding some problems, so we brought in AppDynamics and were able to dive further in, but after about six months, New Relic traces we're exactly as in-depth and usable. We were pretty confident with New Relic, and brought AppDynamics in to dive deeper, but their interface was Flash, which was slow and not nice.

Everything else about New Relic was nice. We could put different pieces of data in front of the developers, which is nice. They don't have as much information as we do in Ops from our other tools, but they get just the right amount of information to see where the bottlenecks are.

It was quick and simple. Always, whenever we look at a product, including ours, we've got in the back of our heads, what's the mean time to pretty graph? How quick is it to get data in front of you and that's usable? Within minutes we were able to get the information, and the first hour was great with New Relic.

When we're looking at new products, we look at whether the product works, how it works. Doing tests that are long enough is hard as no one wants to spend the time doing it, so I try to make sure that it won't take more than 14 days to set up correctly. If it's important enough, then the trials will be done.

It is one of the things that helps DevOps work in our organization and has helped stop finger pointing. It gives both sides enough info to help point us in the right direction of finding where an issue is. It gives us the insight into production to developers that operations doesn't want developers to have, and it allows them to use it all the time.

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 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.

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.