We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter 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."It is scalable. You can scale up to 1,000 users in JMeter. If you can put up four slave servers, you can easily ramp up to 1,000 users."
"Very user-friendly and easy to use."
"JMeter is a free tool with a large user population, which comes in handy because we have a vast knowledge base to tap into when needed. It's also easier to hire consultants who know JMeter."
"API testing, Database Testing, and MQ testing can be done with ease."
"The solution is free. You don't need to worry about licensing costs."
"What I like best about Apache JMeter is its user-friendly GUI because even if you don't have very good coding knowledge or understanding, or even if you don't come from a development background, you can still use the solution with just a few clicks. This is what's unique about Apache JMeter, in comparison with other tools in the market. As Apache JMeter is open source, when there's a missing feature, you can search in several community blogs for plugins that you can use to modify Apache JMeter to meet your requirements, and this is another advantage."
"The reporting features are really good. There's a lot less latency than other solutions."
"The metrics part of it and the ability to write your custom code to do some specific tests in the performance testing space are the most valuable features."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"Automation is difficult in JMeter."
"I sometimes found the documentation to be not as explanatory as I would've liked it. In the cases that I can think of, I was looking for a rather hand-holding approach with Step A, B, and C, but then I realized that with a product that is open source like this, you can't do handholding. That is because there are so many different uses and different unique environments and setups for it, but I remember thinking a few times that if they only just said this."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"The solution is not user-friendly, there is no framework for autocorrelation or parameterization."
"At times when we overload the application, it gets stuck...After the solution gets stuck due to overloading, we have to restart our computers. In short, the solution keeps crashing."
"JMeter output reports can be difficult to understand without training."
"It should be easier to combine multiple scripts. If you have multiple scripts, you need to write a new script to combine those scripts. The virtual user generator is slow."
"The UI needs some work. The first time I used JMeter, I couldn't record the full scenario to mimic the user experience. Since then, they have introduced some plugins and a third-party tool called BlazeMeter."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Load Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText Silk Performer is ranked 11th in Load Testing Tools with 1 review. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText Silk Performer 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 OpenText Silk Performer writes "Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio and SmartBear LoadNinja, whereas OpenText Silk Performer is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise.
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.
