We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and OpenText Silk Performer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools."In our company, various teams use BlazeMeter, particularly appreciating its cloud license software, which supports up to 5,000 users. BlazeMeter's cloud capabilities allow us to load test or simulate traffic from any location worldwide, such as Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and even specific cities like Delhi. So, with one cloud license, we can simulate user load from various locations globally."
"The extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"The on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."
"BlazeMeter's most valuable feature is its cloud-based platform for performance testing."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"Integration with APM tools like Dynatrace or AppDynamics needs to be improved."
"For a new user of BlazeMeter, it might be difficult to understand it from a programming perspective."
"BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"We encountered some minor bugs, and I would like to have the ability to add load generators to workspaces without having to use APIs. We can't do that now, so we're beholden to the APIs."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Load Testing Tools with 41 reviews while OpenText Silk Performer is ranked 10th in Load Testing Tools with 1 review. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while OpenText Silk Performer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Silk Performer writes "Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Perfecto, whereas OpenText Silk Performer is most compared with Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
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.
