We performed a comparison between New Relic and Broadcom DX Application Performance Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: New Relic emerges as the preferred choice over Broadcom DX APM due to its versatile features, accurate alerts, better UI, simpler setup process, and more reasonable pricing. While both products have mixed reviews on customer support, New Relic has a wider range of positive feedback. Some users find Broadcom DX APM to be expensive compared to New Relic.
"I like that it gives you a wide range of data where you can see the application outage response from concurrent locations and the number of stalled jobs."
"If there's something that you really need to get at that doesn't come out of the box, you can pretty easily put together some custom metrics and get those in place."
"The CA tools allow to me to get into detailed transactions for custom ranking, and be able to make predictions. It also gathers data. Some other tools may be good at one area, but not good overall, including the mainframe."
"Proactive snapshots of transactions and all details of a transaction are saved in case of an error."
"JVM memory monitoring and connection pool monitoring are valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management for me is transaction monitoring. The technical support provided for the solution is also an advantage."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...there is a very easy way to deal with it by adding more servers to the application."
"The executive dashboard we created gives a lot of visibility. There's no working on something for a little bit before someone knows."
"The solution offers good documentation."
"New Relic's dashboard is nice, and it's reliable. It's also compatible with many services, especially Java and the Python ecosystem."
"The stability of New Relic APM is very good."
"The tool's most valuable features were APM and core reliability. We get alerts whenever an anomaly is detected. The solution is very friendly."
"It has the ability to monitor random URLs not tied to the one pinger per application (though it costs extra)."
"We detect issues using dashboards that we built on New Relic."
"New Relic has helped us in terms of the optimizing our print and loading times."
"You don't have to go through a list of 500 servers."
"The reports are a key part of APM in my vision because it is through them that we manage to generate the evidence to direct the development team and operational support to address. However, we can not extract the information of the tool through reports. We have needed several times to use screen print screen, CTRL + C and CTRL + V."
"User Experience is a BIG one. Integration of all of APM components into one swift deployment."
"Java Console uses too much memory."
"It doesn't have a proper database, and the configuration is very difficult."
"I think as we're all moving forward to automated deployments, it'd be nice to have that out-of-the-box with this product."
"Support could be much better."
"There is no auto flow diagram, and the alert mechanism is not as good when compared to other tools."
"Improve the targeting interface is to make it more user-friendly and current."
"There are certain features that are not supported in New Relic, such as CATSEARCH, which allows you to do a full-text search."
"It is complicated, especially in how you interpret the data that it provides. If it had a bit more canned, out-of-the-box features, especially some of the reporting features, that would be more useful."
"The scalability can be improved."
"The price could improve."
"The solution does not provide input on how the page performs in a big group. It just says that the page performance is bad, but it does not say what can be done to improve it. If they could provide some insight or guidance on how to make improvements, that would be a big help."
"The initial setup can be made easier. Like Mixpanel, New Relic can also have a step-by-step guide for the setup process."
"The integration and configuration of this product in our AWS environment needs improvement on the filtering part. I would like it to go more granular on accounts."
"I haven't come across any features that are lacking."
More Broadcom DX Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is ranked 25th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 161 reviews while New Relic is ranked 3rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 151 reviews. Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is rated 8.0, while New Relic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management writes "Provides efficiency in migration and DAW but requires a high level of administrator knowledge for configuration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of New Relic writes "Has a simple user interface and end-to-end monitoring and self-healing features". Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, BMC TrueSight Operations Management and OpenText Diagnostics, whereas New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Azure Monitor. See our Broadcom DX Application Performance Management vs. New Relic report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
AppDynamics, New Relic & CA Technologies?
It all depends on the problems you want to solve. They all have their strengths. CA is long in the tooth (old) and with NetQoS has new life being pushed into it, but making it all fit is a challenge. Also with CA you may have to open up the applications to add some other custom monitoring of application package names/methods if you want more detail than out of the box.
Understanding the full flow of a transaction when it talks to other transactions was our key to understanding why we had issues. The Riverbed family of products enabled that for us but even that required work on our part to further decode the MQ traffic better than they did. It went into the MQ Black box, and came out, but did not reveal what happened inside the box. There were requests inside the box that went elsewhere. Those had not been picked up with the tool.
Cons for all of them are that they only sample transactions and can't follow a single user from their device all the way through to the backend database or mainframe. Best using dynaTrace if you want true 100% end to end monitoring.
Saluting Mike, Richard for your sound advice!
Henry
I have found Dynatrace to be much better. It integrates with more tools than any of the 3 listed above.
From my experience with CA Wily, it's more expensive and requires a long implementation, it is also less flexible.
We did not consider New Relic because we did not want to have our sensitive data hosted in the cloud. Not acceptable in our business.
AppDynamics offered a short implementation time, immediate satisfaction and only required fine-tuning afterwards. Also the pricing was lower then CA Wily.
All three are good tools for monitoring web application transactions. Of course, CA has a much broader set of capabilities than the other two - can monitor networks, servers, databases, etc. AppDynamics provides a product that you can use in-house. NewRelic is only a SaaS offering. Which of these is best for you - depends on what you need. If you already have CA deployed, you are probably looking at just web transaction monitoring then. AppDynamics and NewRelic are more current in this area than CA Wily.