We performed a comparison between AppNeta by Broadcom and New Relic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"We get complete, hop-by-hop visibility into the internet and we can know how much latency is taking place from one hop to another. That way, we know whether a particular hop belongs to the ISP, or that it is something owned by our own client's office, or is something to do with the SaaS network."
"The product helps us understand networks and user experience. It helps us to understand the issues."
"The solution's technical support is very good."
"Delivery and experience are valuable. The usage in terms of the traffic application captures and other similar things is also valuable."
"This solution helps prove that, if we move to cloud, we'll still be as effective as we are on-premises."
"The main feature that we use is what they call Delivery, which is the testing of network paths end-to-end."
"A lot of times one of the AppNeta transactions showed that there is an issue, whereas everything seemed to be working properly. Once we dug into it, we realized that it really was highlighting a problem that otherwise we would not have seen."
"It has helped my organization to dive deeper into the application using the APM module is very helpful."
"The VPN is one of the solution's most valuable features for us."
"The most important thing is that it tells us where the latency in throughput and response time are."
"End-user Synthetics and monitoring are very good."
"We detect issues using dashboards that we built on New Relic."
"It offers helpful user metrics so we can learn more about the user experience."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to manage the application flow."
"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."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Instead of integrating with other people, they should expand their interior capabilities."
"I think some of the product's documentation has shortcomings and needs improvement."
"Cloud monitoring could be better. That's one of the biggest pain points for me. I have shared this feedback with them multiple times, but they're limited to some extent. That's one area where I've seen a problem."
"AppNeta by Broadcom needs to add more features to its dashboards. It also needs to work on providing out-of-the-box reports."
"Having to deal with configuring the end devices using a USB stick is a bit cumbersome. It would be nice if there was a better way of handling that."
"They should try and make diagnostics run a bit quicker. When the problem occurs on a network, AppNeta runs automatic diagnostics on the end-to-end path. The path it was testing only to the destination, it now runs the same test to all of the devices and all the intermediate devices. Depending on the number of intermediate devices, it can take several minutes to run. If we're trying to find or diagnose a problem that only lasts two or three minutes, it may be that the diagnostics is still running by the time the problem is cleared. The only thing, which I have also mentioned to AppNeta in the past, is that there should be much faster and much more lightweight diagnostics, which can be completed within 30 seconds or one minute, rather than in 5 to 10 minutes."
"I would like to see some advanced dashboard features. It could also be integrated with third-party tools. For example, an integration with a reporting solution would be helpful. Out-of-the-box, there are few dashboards or reports. What it does have is useful, but there should be additional dashboards."
"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."
"The initial setup can be made easier. Like Mixpanel, New Relic can also have a step-by-step guide for the setup process."
"I would like to see the company implement the AI auto-baseline feature which Dynatrace has."
"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 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."
"New Relic APM can improve the information when we dig deeper to check a problem. There should be more detailed information provided."
"I haven't come across any features that are lacking."
"They should bring the pricing down to be more competitive."
AppNeta by Broadcom is ranked 20th in Network Monitoring Software with 17 reviews while New Relic is ranked 6th in Network Monitoring Software with 152 reviews. AppNeta by Broadcom is rated 8.6, while New Relic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AppNeta by Broadcom writes "Excellent support, easy configuration, and a reliable tool to know what the problem is and where the problem is". 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". AppNeta by Broadcom is most compared with ThousandEyes, DX NetOps, vRealize Network Insight, NETSCOUT nGeniusONE and PRTG Network Monitor, whereas New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Prometheus. See our AppNeta by Broadcom vs. New Relic report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
