We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Performance Tester and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA 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."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests."
"The most valuable feature depends on what we're doing at the time. In the past, the greatest feature was the ability to record and play back to produce a script. Another great feature is that we can monitor the system. They also support many protocols to perform load testing."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website."
"The capabilities and flexibility of the Controller, the ability to monitor the systems under test, and the comprehensive results Analysis which saves a great deal of time."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"The number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"We don't find any features lacking. One of the most beneficial points we have from LoadRunner is we start sizing our infrastructure accordingly. So what we do is when we deploy a new workload, we do performance testing."
"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."
"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."
"Sometimes, we aren't able to see an accurate page view while replying and executing the script. When you are navigating the application side by side, it needs to be displayed on a random viewer. Sometimes we will get a few applications, and we won't get others."
"If they can make LoadRunner more comprehensive, it would really help."
"The monitoring technology in LoadRunner could be improved. It depends on another tool called SiteScope, but they only took a part of the features of SiteScope. They need to improve on that."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
"The only scenario we see a complexity is when we have single-page applications where JavaScript is talking to the server and coming back. That's the only scenario where we find some difficulties."
"If the support of the protocols was the same throughout the other protocols and it was there evenly, then I would rate the product higher."
"We'd like the solution to be a bit more user-friendly."
"I would like them to lower the licensing cost and provide better support."
More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational Performance Tester is ranked 24th in Test Management Tools while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 76 reviews. IBM Rational Performance Tester is rated 7.6, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. 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 OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". IBM Rational Performance Tester is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and BlazeMeter.
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.