BlazeMeter Reviews

We were doing load testing. We were testing web servers, and we needed to confirm that our servers were performing as well as the old ones.

One example of what happened is that we noticed that there was a significant difference between our two sites. It turned out that there was a configuration on the network side so after we fixed that, the performance was much better.

It helped to identify where there were problems, and then we could go investigate and figure out what was going on. We didn't just do one test, but this was a one-time sanity check on the new environment. One time lasted three months, but during that time, I would say we did it once a week.

There was one feature that I wanted that they didn't have. The feature was starting two tests simultaneously, but keeping the data separate, and showing separate graphs from two different test instances on the same display.

What happened is that I was trying to run two tests at the same time so I would have to do one in one window, one in the other window, and there was a few seconds difference, which was okay. Then, I would have to take the tests in one browser, and compare them to the tests in another browser.

If they could combine functionality and put them side by side with the same scale for me, that would've been ideal. I was using one standard testing configuration.

We used it, I would say, for three months, to do performance testing on a very specific application.

We did not encounter any stability issues.

We didn't have any scalability issues. I can't remember how many users we had. We weren't doing incredible load testing. We were just using heavy load testing. There were no issues on the BlazeMeter side.

I would rate the technical support as 9/10, as I used it quite a few times. There was one instance where there was a timing mixup with a support engineer, which I was disappointed about, but the service was totally great. I would call them up with a question, they would answer it. It was fine.

I did not use any solution previously. I chose them because somebody else in my company had used them before, and had told me that they were very good.

The setup was straightforward. We had a very simple setup. We had a very simple testing scenario. After I watched the one-hour video, how the thing works, and then it showed up your URLs to test, I entered that, and there were two options we had to choose. Technically, it was very straightforward just for pure load testing.

The pricing was straightforward. That was no issue. To have the features, the special features that I wanted, realistically it could've been cheaper, but you get what you pay for. It was fair pricing, it was just a lot for our purchasing pipeline.

I did a small evaluation, not very intensive. I would say a very small evaluation. Nothing significant.

I would say use it, but people also have to know that they have to do their own due diligence and they have to make sure that their servers are okay. My advice would be to gather statistics on the servers as the tests are running, so that if the test indicates that there's something wrong, you can quickly look to the CPU, to the memory, to get an idea if it looks like it's an internal issue, or if it looks like it's an external issue.

We used BlazeMeter for our performance testing. It allows us to run our tests on the local area network. Its primary use is to make sure that applications can handle a high load before going into the production environment. It will generate a report with the results.

The clients come up with some of the test cases and we have to validate them.

Using this product has improved the way our organization does testing.

This is a customizable product.

The documentation is good.

The sharing works well.

Having more options for customization would be helpful.

We have been using BlazeMeter for the last six months.

We have about 20 users who run over 1,000 test cases.

The technical support is good. They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us.

I started working directly with Blazemeter. There is another person in the company who is using LoadRunner and it costs about $300 per year.

The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use BlazeMeter to perform load testing on our different web portals. Starting from JMeter scripts and based on users' behavior, we use the BlazeMeter workspace to adjust ramp-up. We study contemporary users and different scenarios in order to meet business expectations in terms of the required SLA.

BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process. Before BlazeMeter, we used to set up an ad-hoc infrastructure with no formal structure in terms of the scope, or how and when to provision it. This meant additional costs in terms of resources and time for managing the load-test infrastructure.

The reuse of JMeter scripts has allowed us to have continuity with the past, meaning that we didn't need to change the way we write scripts and collaborate with business users. Furthermore, it has given us a common way to modelize our campaigns with different technical partners, or different development teams.

A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools. Different plugins for the most common APM tools could help to reconcile traffic charges with application behavior. For example, a root cause analysis of bottlenecks or analysis of non-linear behavior in applications.

Our primary use case is to create processes for performance. I created a one time function and implemented it for 1,000 users. 

I really like the recording because, with JMeter, the recording takes me a lot of time to get used to. With, BlazeMeter the recording is quick.

In terms of improvement, I would like it to have the ability to customize reports. 

We have been using BlazeMeter for around two months. 

It is stable. 

I implemented it for 1,000 users. 

The initial setup was straightforward. I deployed it myself. Because I'm new to BlazeMeter it took two days to deploy because I needed to study it first also.

I deployed and also maintain it myself. 

I also evaluated JMeter and LoadRunner but I prefer BlazeMeter because of the speed and because it's easier to use. 

I would rate it a seven out of ten. I would recommend it. 

I would like for it to be Windo-based. It should have the ability to be implemented into Windows applications. 

We have an AWS elastic beanstalk Node.js express backend with Mongodb that we expect to experience a significant amount of load in the coming weeks. 

BlazeMeter has allowed my organization to identify bottlenecks in our infrastructure and better prepare for large amounts of traffic.

The test scenario definition feature is extremely easy to use and makes configuring tests an extremely fast process. I have found this feature to be the most valuable.

More runs per month for the basic plan would be useful. Also, being able to stream logs from AWS and integrate them with the test reports would be excellent.

This solution seems very stable.

The product seems extremely scalable. 

Great and responsive!

No, this was the first solution.

It was extremely easy to get set up.

In-house team with a lot of expertise.

Cost is a little high but is reasonable for a startup at our scale. For personal use I believe the pricing for the paid plans is a bit out of reach.

BlazeMeter was the clear choice for our infrastructure.

Excellent product!

The metrics are a great feature for analyzing each test. Being able to see the errors compiled, along with their responses, has been very useful. 

We also love having the ability to compare multiple test results in one screen. The multi-test feature is very useful as well. The ease for creating tests in BlazeMeter has been wonderful.

It has allowed us to run performance tests in order to help determine if we can scale well.

The ability to run node.js scripts needs to improve.

I have used this solution for around two months.

We have not encountered any particular stability issues.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

We did not previously use a different solution.

The setup was pretty straightforward.

It would be nice to have more flexible pricing options.

Having a simple setup and being able to get the tests up and running right away, is the key for this solution.

The ability to scale JMeter tests easily. This isn't possible with traditional load testing approaches.

BlazeMeter allows us to easily run our existing load testing solutions at massive scale.

All of our consultants can use BlazeMeter. Traditionally our tests were run in JMeter and this was limited to technical users. BlazeMeter allows the use of the same tests but in a more user-friendly environment where all of our consultants can run the tests and access the results.

BlazeMeter is a cost effective way to scale our existing JMeter load tests.

Running of multi-tests could be improved to make it easier to create them. Apart from that nothing else springs to mind.

The application has been stable in most of our tests to date. We experience the odd bug, but BlazeMeter are quick to resolve any issues.

We have tested up to hundreds of thousands of concurrent users and the system performed well.

Easy to use and effective.

Initial setup is very easy.

When selecting a vendor, I look at ease of use, support, product maturity, and their partner model.

BlazeMeter is a great solution to run your existing tests. You will need detailed knowledge of JMeter to get the most out of your testing and BlazeMeter offer comprehensive training if you are new to this.

Load generation over cloud is the most valuable feature. This feature is most valuable for us because we use BlazeMeter for load testing. This helps us procure the required load generation infrastructure.

I have used BlazeMeter personally and my experience has been:

Whenever we want to provision more load generators (10 or more), it takes too long to initiate the test. Sometimes, the load generators have not even started and after waiting for 10 minutes or more, we get to know that we need to restart. This creates an awkward situation, when the client is also monitoring live execution and waiting for the test to start.

I have come across multiple instances, where the actual test was run for x hours but the server hours that were deducted from my account, were on the basis of x+1 hours. I have to keep monitoring the usage report frequently and request for credit back of all such server hours. Although, I get them back without any argument with the BlazeMeter team but still, it creates an overhead for me.

It needs to improve the server hour calculation and the provisioning of load generation machines.

I have used this solution for more than six months.

We had some stability issues; sometimes the load generators do not start at all.

We encountered some scalability issues. The start time for load test increases with the increase in number of users to be simulated.

I would give the technical support a 5/10.

The setup was straightforward.

The pricing could be more competitive.

We did not evaluate any other options.