We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and OpenText Silk Performer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Load Testing Tools.
"The product is good, and the concept is good as well."
"Provides the performance of load test applications and reliably on good reporting."
"It allows you to work out how well you are doing project-wise because you see the number of scripts done, the number of tests run, and whether you have mapped all your requirements to it."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is recording and replaying, and the fact that there are multiple options available to do this."
"You can test a huge variety of applications, not just web-based systems, but SAP, Oracle, web services, pretty much anything out in the market place, but it's mobile-based testing."
"We are delivering fine performance results and performance recommendations using Performance Center."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters."
"With Performance Center, the version upgrade is easy. You just have to roll out the new patch or the new version."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format."
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise doesn't support some mainframe protocols. We had to build scripts to access the interface."
"The support team needs to be more coordinated."
"After they get over the acquisition, the first improvement is going to be tailoring it for their existing stack of other products. How would LoadRunner work for Documentum? How would it work for Business Network? How would it work for other apps? They can have a pre-package or a guide because they are all in the same family as opposed to being outside."
"The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Load Testing Tools with 81 reviews while OpenText Silk Performer is ranked 11th in Load Testing Tools with 1 review. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while OpenText Silk Performer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Silk Performer writes "Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas OpenText Silk Performer is most compared with Apache JMeter.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load Testing Tools 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.
