We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and New Relic based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure Monitor is praised for its lower cost, better integration with Microsoft technologies, and its ability to monitor cloud resources across multiple subscriptions. Although New Relic is easy to use and provides in-depth application information, it is criticized for its pricing structure and lack of network monitoring features. Azure Monitor also offers valuable resources for new users with customizable templates and best practices from Microsoft. Overall, Azure Monitor is regarded as a strong and dependable product that offers excellent value for its cost.
"Among the valuable features of this solution, Application Insights stands out as one of the most significant. It provides insights into application performance and helps identify issues and bottlenecks."
"The solution works well overall. It's easy to implement and simple to use."
"It is a robust, stable product."
"For me, the best feature is the log analysis with Azure Monitor's Log Analytics. Without being able to analyze the logs of all the activities that affect the performance of a machine, your monitoring effectiveness will be severely limited."
"It's a Microsoft native tool, so it works well with other Microsoft technologies, which is predominantly what our customer end-user base is."
"Azure Monitor is really just a source for Dynatrace. It's just collecting data and monitoring the environment and the infrastructure. It is fairly good at that."
"The dashboard allows us to easily track various metrics and quickly understand the overall health of our system."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"We were able to integrate with the messaging tool, Slack, which meant that we got notifications whenever something was not quite right."
"It has in-depth analysis using developer code for someone whose not traditionally a developer."
"The integration and configuration of New Relic is straightforward and easy."
"The stability of New Relic APM is very good."
"New Relic has helped us in terms of the optimizing our print and loading times."
"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 most valuable feature is application monitoring."
"The pricing is pretty good."
"If it is configured incorrectly, you can end up with a huge bill."
"The default interface should be improved."
"They can simplify the overall complexity since you have multiple data sources in the cloud for monitoring. It's quite simple, but there are so many portals. It takes time to work with it. If they could simplify the user configuration, that would be good."
"They need to work with other cloud providers - not just Azure."
"The query builder could be better. In comparison to other monitoring tools, in order to use Azure Monitor, your engineers need to have KQL experience. If they don't, it's not intuitive as a system."
"The solution needs better monitoring. It requires better log controls."
"I'd like the solution to do more around vulnerability assessment. It's lacking in the product right now."
"Although it's not always the case, the price can sometimes get expensive. This depends on a number of factors, such as how many services you are trying to integrate with Azure Monitor and how much storage they're consuming each month (for example, how large are the log files?)."
"The older view is much better than the new view that they have. We'd like to go back to that previous version. The user interface just isn't as nice as it used to be."
"Some AIOps are missing in New Relic APS, and I would like to see more features in this area."
"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."
"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."
"The solution only supports the cloud platform and not on-premises."
"One thing I'd like to see in any APM, especially New Relic, is the ability to use distributed transactions. When one microservice calls another, it calls another database and microservice. The entire data visualization layer will not be able to correlate from one microservice from end to end and return on that path. Distributed transactions would be a great addition that would make life simpler. Unfortunately, no APM has that end-to-end capability."
"The customization of the start and end time is kind of cool."
"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."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while New Relic is ranked 3rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 152 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while New Relic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". 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". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Prometheus, Sentry and Elastic Observability, whereas New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Sentry. See our Azure Monitor vs. New Relic report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.
