We performed a comparison between HyperScience and Tungsten RPA based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Valuable features include tools like IQ Bot and the ability to extract handwritten documents with 93-95 per cent accuracy."
"It provides the best accuracy for handwritten forms, which is a struggle in the industry. You can take processes with a lot of manual work and streamline them through this tool."
"Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"One of the most valuable features of HyperScience is the user-training module. Whenever the extraction takes place, based on the way we have trained HyperScience, it would give us some success status or a certain confidence level. If the solution has processed something that it determined was not extracted correctly it will queue those items for manual review."
"I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"The ability to script information from websites is most valuable. It also seems to be fairly robust and reasonably easy to manage on a server-based deployment. We have a number of robots operating on the central server."
"You can automate browsing tasks without needing a server connection. The platform provides its browser, allowing you to run anything inside it."
"The most valuable feature of Kofax RPA is the simplicity of automating tasks."
"Kofax RPA's best feature is its high success percentage in picking up information from documents, especially where the DPI is really low."
"The drag and drop functionality is quite good."
"The pricing of the solution is quite good."
"This is a stable platform and we did not encounter any big problems."
"Kofax handles UIs via the browser well. If it's not possible, they have other features like modeling screen scrapes, etc."
"Extracting tables from certain documents could be improved."
"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"No solution is perfect and there are several different scenarios that could be improved in HyperScience. One area is where there are multiple tables in the same form I have seen HyperScience struggle. There is some issue with supporting the extraction from multiple tables involved on the same form. If this could improve, it would be a big benefit."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"The product's usability could be better. The first pain point is that we're getting the output in a different format, and we were expecting a different timetable. The second point is that if you want better results, HyperScience says you have to configure a minimal PDF or a maximum of 400 PDFs. If you want results with 400 PDFs for what's written by these doctors, then you also configure the maximum of 400 templates for that. So, it's essentially a lack of support from HyperScience. In the next release, it would be better if failure scenarios were reduced. It would also help if they offered different formats, inputs or injections, and added different scenarios."
"HyperScience has less capability while working on unstructured forms. Unstructured forms are those where there is no standard structure and the information can be anywhere on the form. They need to develop this capability."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
"Its documentation is not widely available on the web. They should work on the availability of its documentation. In Automation Anywhere, there is a feature called Discovery Bot that automatically records the process steps and suggests a possible bot. I am not sure if such a feature is available in Kofax. If it is not available, it will be very good to have this feature. "
"Kofax RPA's UI could be more user-friendly."
"The product has some constraints and performance issues."
"Exception handling needs to be improved."
"The process discovery could be a bit better."
"The solution needs to be scalable."
"We are on version 10.6, and the current version seems to be 11. Kofax is cycling the capabilities of the product very quickly. One of the difficulties has been to actually keep up with the capabilities as they've evolved. On the one hand, it is good that the product is getting better, but on the other hand, it is difficult to implement the best way with a product that is evolving constantly."
"The technical support must be improved."
HyperScience is ranked 6th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 7 reviews while Tungsten RPA is ranked 12th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 24 reviews. HyperScience is rated 7.6, while Tungsten RPA is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of HyperScience writes "It has a lot of functionality, whatever we use, but a few things could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tungsten RPA writes "A stable product that provides end-to-end solutions for different business problems". HyperScience is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, UiPath, Instabase, Microsoft Power Automate and OpenText Intelligent Capture, whereas Tungsten RPA is most compared with UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere (AA) and Boomi iPaaS. See our HyperScience vs. Tungsten RPA report.
See our list of best Robotic Process Automation (RPA) vendors.
We monitor all Robotic Process Automation (RPA) 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.