Compare CrossBrowserTesting vs. Sauce Labs

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
CrossBrowserTesting Logo
4,168 views|2,355 comparisons
Sauce Labs Logo
6,447 views|3,842 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. Sauce Labs and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
437,827 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site.I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team.CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing.Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms.This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices.The screen shot portal is essential for an easy way to run tests across hundreds of browsers and retrieve screenshots which then indicate success or failure.I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues.

More CrossBrowserTesting Pros »

Live device testing. As we all know, It's really hard and challenging to find/purchase many real devices to test because it will be costly and not all the team can be able to purchase all of the devices out there. We used to have a lot of real devices under our labs. However, it is really time-consuming to maintain those devices and make sure they are up to date with the testing requirements.The insights section provides a great overall state of the automation suite and can identify trends relatively quickly. If we see a dip in our passing rate over time, we can look at what changed when the test started failing to find the root cause rather than doing a quick fix to find that the test fails a short time later.I have found the live test section with Sauce Labs to be extremely valuable. When you can't quite figure out why a test is failing, you can go to the live test results section within their tool and launch your test (specifying a given OS/browser, or device) manually and step through the test to see the issue more clearly, usually opening up the developer's tool console and watching the network calls and console (within Chrome) to usually find the underlying issue.Sauce Lab analytics helped us to get detailed knowledge on test cases execution and logs.The most valuable feature is the cross-browser feature, it has many android and iOS devices both simulators and real devices. It's easy to integrate. I also like video recording too.As stated earlier we use Sauce Labs for a combination of automated testing and manual testing. Therefore the most useful features are the ability to run the functional automated tests via a Sauce Labs tunnels which allows access to applications in our internal network. The second most useful feature is the manual side.Supplying devices to a testing team of possibly close to one thousand testers and developers is a great undertaking but Sauce Labs has made this very easy and a welcomed solution.Sauce Connect gave us ability to test an application that was hosted locally.

More Sauce Labs Pros »

Cons
The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default.This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices.It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish.I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on.Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers.

More CrossBrowserTesting Cons »

Another feature that could still be improved on is more error clarity. Sometimes when running automated scripts the test will fail on the device side instead of the script and errors only show a 500 try again message instead of a detailed script that could of a been a timeout error from the code.As a web product QA team, we sometimes need to spot check some new child site on multiple browsers and OS(es). It was a little time consuming for us since we need to click on each of the browser/OS combinations and start a new session to test. Every sprint, with new features and child pages being added, we mostly need to do the same steps over and over again.The one issue I have is the 14-day trial that a new user gets for free. I understand the concept of the trial period; however, I think this could be revamped to a free 30-minute run time every few months or after a significant update once the trial period has ended.Overall, I think Sauce Labs provides us with a valuable tool and resource. As far as what could be improved, I would say the overall test execution time. Some of the calls take a bit longer than I expect, for example in web browser tests; while the execution time isn't obnoxious, it could be improved so that overall tests/test suites finish faster.They should provide a JIRA integration plugin so that we can easily log issues.The only drawback is the speed, it will be good if we have a server in Asia too. It will be great if we can improve speed while initialization and execution.We have found that during automated testing this can be very slow. This causes inconsistencies with the tests. It's very difficult to rely on a service when you can't be sure if a test will pass or fail the next time it runs. This means building in a lot of sync time into the tests which in turn slows them down. If this speed could be improved then the service would be much better.If I had to speak of an area that could be improved it would probably have to be the speed of interaction with the devices. There is at times a considerable amount of lag while using some of the virtual and at times even physical device farm

More Sauce Labs Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers.CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price.

More CrossBrowserTesting Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
437,827 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing.
Top Answer: This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices.
Top Answer: We needed a consistent way to test our site against multiple browsers and devices. By having access to different devices sporting different versions of each OS, we can ensure our customers are going… more »
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Ranking
8th
Views
4,168
Comparisons
2,355
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
358
Avg. Rating
9.0
5th
Views
6,447
Comparisons
3,842
Reviews
11
Average Words per Review
489
Avg. Rating
8.5
Popular Comparisons
Compared 47% of the time.
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Learn
SmartBear
Sauce Labs
Overview

CrossBrowserTesting is a cloud testing platform that gives instant access to 1500+ different real desktop and mobile browsers for testers, developers, and designers.

  • Native debugging tools make manual testing easy to inspect and correct HTML, CSS, and JavaScript errors on any browser.
  • Take automated screenshots across multiple browsers at once, then compare side-by-side against historical test runs.

Sauce Labs provides the world's largest secure and highly scalable automation cloud for testing desktop, mobile web, native, and hybrid applications. Sauce Labs helps companies accelerate software development cycles, improve application quality, and deploy with confidence across 450+ browser/OS/device/platform combinations.

Offer
Learn more about CrossBrowserTesting
Learn more about Sauce Labs
Sample Customers
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, WistiaSalesforce.com, Mozilla, Zendesk, Puppet Labs, Twitter, Bank of America, Eventbrite, Bleacher Report, Okta, Intuit, Travelocity, Sharecare, CapitalOne.
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm25%
Healthcare Company13%
Logistics Company13%
Media Company13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company35%
Comms Service Provider14%
Media Company12%
Healthcare Company6%
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company16%
Media Company14%
Marketing Services Firm10%
Computer Software Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company50%
Media Company11%
Comms Service Provider10%
Financial Services Firm4%
Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. Sauce Labs and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
437,827 professionals have used our research since 2012.
CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews while Sauce Labs is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 11 reviews. CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0, while Sauce Labs is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CrossBrowserTesting writes "Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sauce Labs writes "Helps us in reducing the number of manual testing". CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with BrowserStack, SmartBear TestComplete, Micro Focus UFT One, Tricentis Tosca and Katalon Studio, whereas Sauce Labs is most compared with BrowserStack, Perfecto Suite, HeadSpin, SmartBear TestComplete and Tricentis Tosca. See our CrossBrowserTesting vs. Sauce Labs report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional 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.