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.
"The deployment was easy."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is its user interface."
"WAS GC monitoring enhanced our application performance and DB SQL performance."
"Command center is a new feature that provides agent maintenance and support without involving the application team. It saves lots of time for APM team."
"If we see something that we need to change or monitor, we can get it scripted pretty quickly."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Scalable, stable, and easy to deploy APM tool which effectively monitors code-level visibility."
"Measurement of response time"
"The VPN is one of the solution's most valuable features for us."
"What I like best about New Relic APM is its user interface because it's simple. The most valuable feature of New Relic APM is end-to-end monitoring."
"The solution is scalable, and it is easy because all the documentation is available."
"We are able to drill down and see what is going on in the system."
"Support for plug-ins (RMQ, Redis etc.) is a valuable feature."
"The stability of New Relic APM is very good."
"It allows the restriction of privileges and control of users."
"The breakdown of the response time of different components and getting in-depth details of the slow component are the most valuable features. It is easy to use, and it gets the job done."
"The APM SQL feature doesn't perform like we would like it to. I know that's a new feature with 10.5, so it may be one of those things that gets a little better, but it should run faster."
"The APM upgrade procedure is a bit complicated with compatibility issues which can emerge like between agents and EM/Collectors."
"A CA APM agent takes a lot of memory. That is one disadvantage. If you configure CA APM correctly it will still consume around 15 to 20 percent of memory."
"System incident analysis and performance monitoring need improvement."
"Java Console uses too much memory."
"The solution still needs the administrator of APM to know a lot more to configure and control everything. So it's a headache for the administrator to do the daily jobs."
"Our users lag how to identify the root cause with this solution. If they could come up with a more user-friendly version, that would be a good thing, since other vendors currently have better features and more user-friendly products than CA APM."
"Technical support needs to be more responsive and address support tickets more quickly."
"Data Dog captures the entire session and then provides it as a video player path, which gives more insight into what the user was doing. It's pretty impressive. New Relic does that, yet it only captures using a couple of screenshots, which is not very detailed since you are unable to see the entire user flow."
"It would help customers if there were an on-premises version available."
"There are times when you restart the engines and the servers have a unique ID for the host and you need to remove the server. It is difficult because some are on-premise and others are production hosts. Having downtime is not very good when updating. However, it is not a constant issue."
"It gives you amazing statistics, but doesn’t give you enough information about what to do with the statistics."
"I would like to have storage monitoring. E.g., being able to monitor SANS, specifically protocols, like NFS and CIFS metrics."
"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 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."
"Compared to their competitors, they are missing some features at the moment."
More Broadcom DX Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is ranked 22nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 161 reviews while New Relic is ranked 3rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 152 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 and BMC TrueSight Operations Management, whereas New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Prometheus. 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.