We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Performance Tester and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools."Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"It can support both web applications and mobile applications, and in certain cases, it can also support testing of desktop applications or software-based applications. You can write web applications, mobile applications, and software-based applications."
"There are several key features, including Jenkins integration, infrastructure monitoring, and results analysis."
"The best feature of the solution is that we can utilize the Tosca scripts for NeoLoad execution."
"We appreciate that this solution is very user-friendly, even if the user does not have a lot of protocol knowledge and experience."
"NeoLoad offers better reporting than most competing tools. It is effortless to analyze and measure the reported data. It's also simple to generate a report that most people can read and management can understand. NeoLoad helps you figure out the main issues inside the application."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"The test cases are quite easy to build and to maintain. This is the most valuable aspect of the solution for us. It's the reason why they changed from JMeter to NeoLoad."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies."
"The solution is not easily scalable. If you want to extend the solution, you need to purchase a different kind of license. You also have to work with the IBM team to assist in scaling."
"The product is expensive."
"There is room for improvement with the support and community documentation as it can be difficult to find answers to questions quickly."
"It is easier to comprehend the analysis on its on-premise setup but not on its on-cloud setup."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
"The product must improve the features that allow integration with CI/CD pipelines."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational Performance Tester is ranked 25th in Test Management Tools while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Performance Testing Tools with 62 reviews. IBM Rational Performance Tester is rated 7.6, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Performance Tester writes "We can edit captured transactions and organize them by those for which we require performance metrics, but it lacks a set of manuals or guides that would take out some guess work". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes " Maintenance will be easy, pretty straightforward to learn and flexible". IBM Rational Performance Tester is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Tricentis Tosca and Eggplant Performance.
We monitor all Test Management 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.