IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. Performance Center

As of May 2019, IBM Rational Quality Manager is ranked 9th in Load Testing Tools with 4 reviews vs Performance Center which is ranked 2nd in Load Testing Tools with 19 reviews. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Quality Manager writes "It allows users to assign each other tasks and view the status of the assigned tasks". The top reviewer of Performance Center writes "It allows you to share resources, which wasn't happening with Load Runner. ". IBM Rational Quality Manager is most compared with Quality Center, TestRail and Zephyr Enterprise. Performance Center is most compared with StormRunner Load, LoadRunner and Quality Center. See our IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. Performance Center report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. Performance Center and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
341,056 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
Reusability and integration capabilities which make it a great choice for organizations that use a variety of development tools and platforms.Latest features include versioning of testings which can be great when used for multiple releases of a product.It allows user to add whichever widget (predefined) based on the need. It has integration with CCM and RM to achieve traceability.

Read more »

We are delivering fine performance results and performance recommendations using Performance Center.IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center.We can book load generators.It is mostly user-friendly and usable.It is also good for reporting purposes, which would be most familiar for QC and UFT users.Support is nice, quick, and responsive.We implemented through the vendor, who used highly-skilled professionals.Provides the performance of load test applications and reliably on good reporting.

Read more »

Cons
Mainly Quality Assurance and DevOps, but of course the whole company and management areas with more knowledge of quality and client success approach.Integration capabilities with other vendors' tools should improve.Organizing the test cases is tedious. There is no mechanism to keep and maintain the test cases as hierarchy. This should be seriously addressed.

Read more »

More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test.Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format.It is tough to maintain from the infrastructure side.New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration.We are expecting more flexible to use Jenkins in continuous integration going forward.On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on.I think better or more integration with some of the monitoring tools that we're considering.I think better support for cloud-based load generators would help. For example, integrate with Amazon AWS so you can quickly spin up a load generator in the cloud, use it, spin it down.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Each license includes 12 months of customer support. A free 90-day trial of the software is also available.The licenses of these tools (the whole CLM package) is very costly as compared to other vendors' tools.

Read more »

It is a bit expensive when compared with other tools.ROI is 200%.It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution. It's not cheap.For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Load Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
341,056 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
9th
out of 24 in Load Testing Tools
Views
3,270
Comparisons
1,093
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
317
Avg. Rating
7.3
2nd
out of 24 in Load Testing Tools
Views
9,304
Comparisons
2,464
Reviews
19
Average Words per Review
443
Avg. Rating
8.7
Top Comparisons
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Also Known As
Rational Quality ManagerMicro Focus Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
Learn
IBM
Micro Focus
Overview
IBM Rational Quality Manager is a collaborative hub for business-driven software and systems quality across virtually any platform and type of testing. This software helps teams share information seamlessly, use automation to accelerate project schedules and report on metrics for informed release decisions. Rational Quality Manager helps quality assurance teams collaborate by sharing project information and status updates seamlessly so team members can synchronize teamwork throughout the lifecycle. It helps them automate by reducing labor-intensive activities to accelerate project schedules. In addition, it helps them govern by understanding and reporting on project metrics enabling accurate, reliable and timely release decisions.

Micro Focus Performance Center is a global cross-enterprise performance testing tool which enables you to manage multiple, concurrent performance testing projects across different geographic locations without any need to travel between the locations. Performance Center administers all your internal performance testing needs. With Performance Center, you manage all aspects of large-scale performance testing projects, including resource allocation and scheduling, from a centralized location accessible through the Web. Performance Center helps streamline the testing process, reduce resource costs, and increase operating efficiency.

Offer
Learn more about IBM Rational Quality Manager
Learn more about Performance Center
Sample Customers
Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, Itaƒ BBA, BarrHexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. Performance Center and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
341,056 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Load 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.

Sign Up with Email