We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The solution helps by detecting bottlenecks."
"The most valuable features are the ability to capture the entire traffic of particular pages and the proper readability of entire pages and entire APIs."
"The recording and playback functionality is helpful."
"Apache JMeter is well-known and widely used among developers, particularly on popular developer forums. While it may not have the most user-friendly interface, it offers strong support through official manuals and various articles from companies providing load testing services. The tool is free, has a substantial community, and serves as a fundamental choice for testers, especially those new to performance testing. While other tools like K6 may be more developer-oriented, JMeter's affordability and accessibility make it suitable for those without extensive performance testing experience."
"The solution is free. You don't need to worry about licensing costs."
"It is an open-source tool that is easy to use. It can be easily integrated with multiple tools, including Selenium."
"We use Apache JMeter for load testing, where we provide the throughput time."
"It is cost-effective and simple to use."
"Since Selenium HQ has multiple plug-ins, we can use it with multiple tools and multiple languages."
"It is programming language agnostic, you can write tests in most currently used languages."
"We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here."
"The grids, as well as the selectors, are the most valuable features."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"The stability and performance are good."
"There is a supportive community around it."
"I have found using IDE and Cucumber framework is good."
"At present, if the number of virtual users increases beyond 10,000 when testing, then it results in a Java heap which causes the solution to crash."
"Both scalability and stability could be improved in Apache JMeter."
"You really need a technical team in order to really utilize the product."
"One of the drawbacks of JMeter is that it can't handle a large amount of load, which forces us to switch to other tools when we need to load more than a 5,000 or 10,000 user load."
"In future releases, it would be helpful if there was an integration with ALM Octane."
"It's not easy to get the data from one place or to do customizations."
"The plug-ins make the reports heavy and they have to be run in non-GUI mode."
"We would like some reporting and analysis tools to be added to this solution."
"It is not easy to make IE plus Selenium work good as other browsers. Firefox and Chrome are the best ones to work with Selenium."
"One drawback to Selenium is that there is nothing like an object repository, such as that found in QTP, especially considering continuous integration practices that have become common nowadays."
"I would like to see automatic logs generated."
"Selenium HQ doesn't support Windows-based applications, so we need to integrate with the third-party vendor. It would be great if Selenium could include Windows-based automation. You need to integrate it with a third-party tool if you want to upload any files. When we interact with a Windows application, we usually use Tosca."
"They should leverage the tools for supporting Windows apps."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"Selenium uses a layer-based approach that is somewhat slower than Eggplant when it comes to executing code."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA).
We monitor all Performance 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.
