Compare Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional vs. Visual Studio Test Professional
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 10 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.2, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional writes "Good synchronization capabilities but pilot processing needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Good integration between the management data and the test cases". Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is most compared with LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and Neotys NeoLoad, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Katalon Studio and Apache JMeter.
 |  |
Most Helpful Review | |||
| Use Visual Studio Test Professional? Share your opinion. | ||
 Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus, Apache, Neotys and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: March 2020. 407,401 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 | |
The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports. I think that analytics is very good and that the analytics features are very powerful. I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good. The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features. The solution is quite stable. The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward. The Analysis feature makes it easy to analyze cross-data and we can pin to the focus period. 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 most valuable features are tools like IntelliSense and ReSharper. Performance-wise, it is a great tool. The most valuable feature is the in-built support for C# and .NET projects. The most valuable features are the SSIS reports, the deployment models, and the ability to interact with other Microsoft tools. The solution is very stable; there's nothing in relation to stability to complain about. The setup is easy and straightforward. Code testing is the most valuable feature of this solution for developing software. We are satisfied with technical support. Communicating with them is very simple. We also have a lot of online resources to check and to study and to train our team with. The documentation is very clear and readily available. |
Cons | |
The debugging capability should be improved. I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator. The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow. The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive. I guess scalability becomes a problem when you use things like TruClients. Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues. The price of this solution should be cheaper. There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner. | The integration with Git needs improving because it is a bit disjointed and unpredictable. The pricing of this solution should be lowered. We would like to be able to easily integrate this solution with our continuous integration tools, such as Jenkins. The documents on the Microsoft website are not very useful, and they ought to make it easier to find answers. The database administration could be better; you should be able to choose new tools with the development environment in Visual Studio. It could be easier to use. The data flow can be improved. Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement. The service right now is far too expensive. You need to pay per user. |
Pricing and Cost Advice | |
The licensing fees are based on the number of users. I don't know the licensing cost, but I think that you would get a discount for normal usage. I think there are different yearly options for different types of usage. It is not only how many users, but also whether it is shareable or not and other criteria involved in each feature. There are additional fees for the users and hardware linked to the processing. | I think that the pricing is quite good. For the cloud services option, you buy a subscription per account or per user. This costs around $52 a month per person. |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs. 407,401 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Ranking  | |
Views 16,860 Comparisons 12,132 Reviews 9 Average Words per Review 452 Avg. Rating 8.1 | Views 4,352 Comparisons 3,509 Reviews 8 Average Words per Review 392 Avg. Rating 8.6 |
Top Comparisons | |
 Compared 22% of the time.  Compared 11% of the time.  Compared 11% of the time. | Compared 16% of the time.  Compared 9% of the time. Compared 9% of the time. |
Also Known As | |
| Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner | |
Learn | |
| Micro Focus | Microsoft |
Overview | |
LoadRunner is the Micro Focus industry-standard software solution for application performance and load testing. LoadRunner stresses your entire system to isolate and identify potential client, network, and server bottlenecks, supporting performance testing of new technologies together with your existing, legacy applications. | Visual Studio Professional Edition provides an IDE for all supported development languages. As of Visual Studio 2010, the Standard edition was dropped. MSDN support is available as MSDN Essentials or the full MSDN library depending on licensing. It supports XML and XSLT editing, and can create deployment packages that only use ClickOnce and MSI. It includes tools like Server Explorer and integration with Microsoft SQL Server also. Windows Mobile development support was included in Visual Studio 2005 Standard, however, with Visual Studio 2008, it is only available in Professional and higher editions. Windows Phone 7 development support was added to all editions in Visual Studio 2010. Development for Windows Mobile is no longer supported in Visual Studio 2010; it is superseded by Windows Phone 7. |
Offer | |
Learn more about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional | Learn more about Visual Studio Test Professional |
Sample Customers | |
| JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media | Transport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa |
Top Industries | |
Software R&D Company25% Financial Services Firm20% Comms Service Provider15% Retailer10% Software R&D Company47% Comms Service Provider13% Insurance Company6% Government6% | Software R&D Company52% Insurance Company10% Media Company6% Healthcare Company6% |
Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus, Apache, Neotys and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: March 2020.
407,401 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See also Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Reviews, Visual Studio Test Professional Reviews, and our list of Best Performance Testing Tools Companies.
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.