We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."The tool's most valuable features are scripting, correlations, and parameterization. Debugging is also easy."
"The fact that you can have tens of thousands of virtual users and just expand an army of load generators to hammer on whatever application you're testing."
"We haven't had an outage since we started using the solution."
"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."
"The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to download everything myself without any IT support."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"For me, LoadRunner stands out, especially with its reporting capabilities, the graphs that can be generated, and the unique feature of measuring our application's response alongside our infrastructure metrics, such as CPU, memory, or disk usage, all presented in graph form. This is something other applications struggle to match."
"The interface is easy to use."
"Visual Studio Test Pro is super helpful for my Microsoft app work."
"The most valuable features are the SSIS reports, the deployment models, and the ability to interact with other Microsoft tools."
"The setup is easy and straightforward."
"The product is good to create big or small projects fastly. It is one of the leaders in the area."
"User-friendly ID and direct integration with GitHub are the most valuable."
"The stability has always been very good."
"The user interface is very friendly."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"The solution is expensive."
"On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"Canned reports are always a challenge and a question with customers because customers want to see sexy reports."
"The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"While the stability is generally good, there are a few strange issues that crop up unexpectedly which affect consistent use of the product."
"Sometimes, the solution hangs, so its performance could be improved."
"The server that we use is very slow so that is concerning for us."
"Sometimes, the product is too complex to use."
"It needs more integration with other tools for monitoring. Microsoft also needs to make it more modern to make it work with microservices and the cloud. It is a bit outdated currently."
"The service right now is far too expensive. You need to pay per user."
"It is not good in terms of performance. When you open Visual Studio, you have to wait for a while to process your code. It uses a lot of resources and has a lot of features. If we could disable some of the features, it would be lighter and faster to use. Nowadays, for some of the projects, we use VS Code for JavaScript or Python. VS Code is very light and easy to use, whereas, in Visual Studio, we have to wait because it takes time to compile or run a project. It has a lot of competitors in terms of performance, such as Intelligent ID. Intelligent ID is very easy to use. It has many features, and it is lighter to use than Visual Studio. In terms of error handling, sometimes, it shows an error before you finish your code, which can be improved. It would be good if it has a version for Linux. I use VS Code on Linux, but I am not sure if Visual Studio has a version for Linux."
"The documentation is limited."
"The tool crashes and has high memory consumption."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 48 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText UFT One, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText LoadRunner Professional.
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.