Performance Center vs. Quality Center

As of June 2019, Performance Center is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 16 reviews vs Quality Center which is ranked 5th in Test Management Tools with 22 reviews. The top reviewer of Performance Center writes "Can be used in all aspects of performance testing: services, web, customized APIs". The top reviewer of Quality Center writes "Range of supported technology expands, but odd IDE design still leave newbies and pro users alike disappointed". Performance Center is most compared with StormRunner Load, LoadRunner and Quality Center. Quality Center is most compared with TFS, UFT (QTP) and IBM Rational Quality Manager.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Performance Center Logo
9,531 views|2,567 comparisons
Quality Center Logo
13,478 views|3,399 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus, Neotys, Apache and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: June 2019.
346,318 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
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 »

Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needsThe enhanced dashboards capabilities are useful for senior management to view the progress of releases under the portfolio in one go and also drill down to the graphs.By standardizing our template, we publish reports at the business unit level.I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects.You can do your development from start to finish: starting with the requirements, ending with defects, and testing in-between.You can plan ahead with all the requirements and the test lab set it up as a library, then go do multiple testing times, recording the default that's in the system.Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects.So the first impression that hits me about HP UFT 14.0 (formerly QTP) is that it seems to be a whole lot faster! But that could be subjective, as I'm running it on a high end gaming system.

Read more »

Cons
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 »

The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT.I would rate it a 10 if it had the template functionality on the web side, had better interfaces between other applications, so that we didn't have dual data entry or have to set up our own migrations.The downside is that the Quality Center's only been available on Windows for years, but not on Mac.It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup.Defect ageing reports need to be included as built-in.There are always new features and more support for new and legacy technology architectures with each release. But the bad news is a growing list of long-standing issues with the product rarely gets addressed.The UI is very dated. Most applications these days have a light UI that can be accessed by pretty much any browser; QC still uses a UI which has a look almost the same for the past 20 years.ALM requires that you install client side components. If your organization does not allow admin rights on your local machine, this means you will need someone to run the installation for you with admin rights. This client side install is also limited to Internet Explorer and does not support any other browsers.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
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.

Read more »

Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive.I feel that the licenses are expensive. ‚ÄčIt has several limitations in adapting its agility easily.Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers.HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models.The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only).For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
346,318 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
9,531
Comparisons
2,567
Reviews
19
Average Words per Review
443
Avg. Rating
8.7
5th
Views
13,478
Comparisons
3,399
Reviews
23
Average Words per Review
469
Avg. Rating
7.7
Top Comparisons
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Also Known As
Micro Focus Performance Center, HPE Performance CenterMicro Focus Quality Center, HPE QC, HPE Quality Center
Learn
Micro Focus
Micro Focus
Overview

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.

Test more, test faster.

Eliminate poor quality releases and reduce the cost of rewriting applications with Micro Focus Quality Center.

Quality Center helps teams build and organize the testing effort, track progress throughout the application lifecycle, and is architected around testing best practices, asset fostering re-use. Teams can quickly build or import requirements and tests, execute enhanced manual testing, schedule and manage test-automation and manage defects throughout the lifecycle.

Offer
Learn more about Performance Center
Learn more about Quality Center
Sample Customers
Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlueQuality Center has over 5,000 customers including The Federal Administration, Bank Asya, CitiPower, Powercor, DB Systel, JetBlue, Seagate, Swiss Life, and NNE Pharmaplan.
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm28%
Insurance Company17%
Retailer14%
Comms Service Provider10%
REVIEWERS
Insurance Company17%
Financial Services Firm14%
Media Company10%
Energy/Utilities Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Insurance Company34%
Healthcare Company29%
Financial Services Firm14%
Aerospace/Defense Firm6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise6%
Large Enterprise84%
REVIEWERS
Small Business18%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise64%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Midsize Enterprise5%
Large Enterprise95%
Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus, Neotys, Apache and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: June 2019.
346,318 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.

Sign Up with Email