OpenText LoadRunner Professional Previous Solutions
SP
Shivam Paul
Lead Performance Engineer at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
When we started looking into getting LoadRunner licenses for AT&T, we picked three out in the market, like BlazeMeter and NeoLoad. We wanted to evaluate everything.
We gave a fair opportunity to all the other products so that every team member within our office could see everything.
But from what we saw, LoadRunner was cutting-edge. There were so many things with BlazeMater. We couldn't do what we needed to do with other products. With LoadRunner, the documentation sometimes is not updated but we get support when we are stuck. It's a great tool.
View full review »I have used several tools, but Micro Focus is the best. We can get things done in a very short period of time. If we used an open source tool, then we would need more time.
View full review »I was using JMeter previously, it works on a similar basis. LoadRunner has an issue with its limited support, while JMeter has an open source, and it is easy to integrate with different solutions. The downside of the JMeter is that it is inefficient to detect threats in large-scale applications.
Buyer's Guide
OpenText LoadRunner Professional
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText LoadRunner Professional. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
767,847 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We used JMeter. We switched because of the better support and flexibility offered by LoadRunner. It has a very wide range of support, covering most protocols and applications currently on the market.
View full review »DS
Dibyajipan Sethi
Performance Task Consultant at PCS Systemtechnik GmbH
I have experience using Apache JMeter, LoadRunner Community Edition, and LoadRunner Cloud Edition. As a support specialist, I continue to utilize these solutions indirectly based on the project requirements, as I am not the decision-maker regarding the specific tool selection.
View full review »I also have experience with JMeter. In comparison, if it's a wave application or to some degree API testing, then JMeter works well and it's a free tool so we can tweak it to our needs. We can use BlazeMeter for the same purpose. They are cheaper options than LoadRunner. But when it comes to different types of protocols, unique protocols, those are typically supported by LoadRunner. It's a very comprehensive tool and that's why it's costly.
AN
Arssy Hasyir Nursidiq
Script analyst at Alpha Citra Siber Indonesia
I have previously used JMeter.
View full review »I have used JMeter and NeoLoad. I switched to LoadRunner because the client preferred it. If they have a budget and need to see clear views, we will opt for LoadRunner. However, if they lack funds, they can use an open-source tool like JMeter. I also have more experience with LoadRunner, so I would prefer to use that. We can write any number of lines of code manually to make the script work.
LoadRunner is a little more expensive than NeoLoad, but LoadRunner's interface is more user-friendly.
View full review »RS
reviewer1399428
Senior Consultant at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Previously, I have not used any other solution.
View full review »SG
Shivakumar-Gutte
Senior Manager at Capgemini
I am new to this company. I only use the company website and the CS portal. Other than that, I do not use any of the other products.
I work in performance testing and I am currently using RadView or WebLOAD, as well as a Micro Focus LoadRunner and Silk Performer. At the same time, I used a couple of IBM products, including SLAMD and the rational performance tester. Aside from that, I use a variety of other products such as JMeter and others.
View full review »SJ
reviewer1576428
Engineer 2 at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
So far, I have also used JMeter. Compared to JMeter, LoadRunner is the best tool out there. As per the feedback from my peers, most of them prefer LoadRunner in terms of performance testing - executions, scripting and debugging (which provides more insight during our work)
View full review »I have used several other performance testing tools.
One of the other ones that I have used is NeoLoad, which is a more recent entrant in this space. It's a lot more flexible to use than some other products.
When it comes to setting up test cases, the process is slightly different in NeoLoad. It is a little more automated than LoadRunner.
NeoLoad is also more cost-effective than LoadRunner.
The suitability of one product over another depends on the use case. Both of them have their strengths. LoadRunner is a much more longstanding and mature product in the market.
View full review »VC
Venu Cherukuri
Lead Solution Architect at a consumer goods company with 10,001+ employees
In 2002, was the first time I was actually really involved in bringing the tool in. Ever since, I go to new employers, the tool was already there. I help take it to the next level, mature the practice of what not, but again there's only one instance where I really had to bring the tool in, but everywhere else, we already had a tool in place.
Back then, there was no competition. It was the only choice there. After that, whenever I moved companies, the tool was already there. I was involved in the sense of bringing new protocols, new additional licenses, and so on.
View full review »RA
Rajesh Anampally
Performance Architect at valuelabs LLP
Previously, we were using HP. Though the tool's functionalities remain the same, its ownership keeps getting changed. We go with multiple open-source solutions like JMeter and all.
GA
GauravArora
Lead Test Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
In addition to LoadRunner, I was also using Apache JMeter for about three years. JMeter does not support live monitoring unless you use a plugin. However, JMeter has better infrastructure support than LoadRunner.
My company did not switch from JMeter to LoadRunner. They already had already purchased LoadRunner licenses. There are a lot of inherent limitations with JMeter, including analytics capabilities.
View full review »We used JMeter which is open source, same problem though - reporting is open source. Zero support because it's open source. When we ran into a problem, no help from JMeter. That's why we moved to using LoadRunner.
View full review »As an independent vendor we use JMeter, The Grinder and Oracle Application Tool Suite’s load test module, but all of these tools don’t have the breadth of supporting protocols and so are not always suitable for our client’s applications and systems being tested. They are also sub-optimal from an analysis perspective, but do a good job.
View full review »We didn't use any other solution previously.
View full review »I don't recall looking at other options. We simply decided to go with Loadrunner from the beginning.
View full review »AR
reviewer1394802
Performance Engineer with 10,001+ employees
Right now we use LoadRunner and Performance Center depending on what we believe are best practices for different situations. We are considering evaluating other options as well, including LoadRunner SaaS.
View full review »RV
QAmgr9845
QA Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We previously used JMeter.
View full review »I used JMeter and Oracle Application Testing Suite as well, but according to our client’s wish we went for this solution.
View full review »We've also been using IBM Rational Performance Test but have found that LoadRunner is better than the IBM tools.
View full review »I started performance testing with LoadRunner and I'm still using it. I have used other tools, but its the best all rounder.
View full review »
No, but I have evaluated many other solutions.
View full review »
I used NeoLoad, but it does not support Citrix, so we chose LoadRunner.
View full review »NN
reviewer2331156
CTO at a tech consulting company with 201-500 employees
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is easier to use than IBM. It supports a lot of protocols compared to competitors.
View full review »NP
reviewer906219
Senior Architect at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
We have used multiple testing tools like Visual Studio and NeoLoad. We have all of these as options. LoadRunner is easier to use and has support for better protocols.
View full review »I have used Apache JMeter too, but it supports limited protocols. HPE LoadRunner's protocol support is wide.
View full review »We had to promote performance testing at some clients because they weren't doing anything at all. That was one use case. The second use case was they were developing some other tools, and coming from a stability standpoint and also from a quality pedigree standpoint, LoadRunner stands out. It's very easy to find resources, so it all adds up.
We ended up with LoadRunner because it has a big market share. Our company has been using LoadRunner for over 11 years, although we have used other products as well. But in terms of stability of the product and ease of finding resources, ultimately it comes down to the resources. The clients are going to be the ones using the tool. You're not going to find a lot of resources with the other company performance testing tools and resources are very low on the open source tools, so that's why we pitched LoadRunner.
AK
AmitKumar2
BI Analyst at eVision Industry Software
We've basically used LoadRunner since the beginning; we find it more user-friendly than other tools.
View full review »I previously used MS VSTS and JMETER. I would recommend LoadRunner as it is user friendly and has support for many protocols.
View full review »Buyer's Guide
OpenText LoadRunner Professional
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText LoadRunner Professional. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
767,847 professionals have used our research since 2012.