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."This is a product that has a lot of capabilities and is the most mature tool of its kind in the market."
"We have Performance Center as a platform to share with others that don't do performance testing full-time, so that they in an agile fashion, on demand can go ahead and get real issue-finding testing done."
"Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration allows for quick comparison of monitoring and performance results, a feature I highly appreciate."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"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."
"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."
"We can measure metrics like hits per second and detect deviations or issues through graphs. We can filter out response times based on timings and identify spikes in the database or AWS reports."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"The solution is expensive."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"When we have a new application, recording the application is a pretty tough task. We have tried multiple things. We do scripting or try to record with different settings and on different machines. We try to record multiple times, but we do not know why it is recording and why it is not recording. We do the same thing on different machines. It sometimes records, and at other times, it does not. That is one of the major concerns."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise doesn't support some mainframe protocols. We had to build scripts to access the interface."
"Offering a direct integration feature would ensure a completely smooth experience."
"The cost of the solution is high and can be improved."
"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems. We have had to re-install, try to install on a different machine, etc. We have not been able to launch the LRE server itself yet."
"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.