We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter, RadView WebLOAD, and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable aspect of BlazeMeter is its user-friendly nature, ability to conduct distributed load testing and comprehensive analysis and reporting features. It particularly excels in providing a clear and organized view of load test results."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"I really like the recording because when I use the JMeter the scripting a lot of recording it takes me a lot of time to get used to. The BlazeMeter the recording is quick."
"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."
"Using cloud-based load generators is highly valuable to us, as we can test from outside our network and increase load generation without having to upscale our hardware as much. The cloud load generator is there when we need it and is the feature we leverage the most."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is reporting."
"The most valuable aspect is that the IDE is simple and it's quick to complete the process."
"The solution is simple and useful."
"The test cases are quite easy to build and to maintain. This is the most valuable aspect of the solution for us. It's the reason why they changed from JMeter to NeoLoad."
"Tricentis NeoLoad is quite easy to use as compared to JMeter."
"NeoLoad is best tool for testing in production without making many changes to the script or solution."
"It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to execute parallel requests, unlike JMeter and LoadRunner which can only be run sequentially."
"From a functional perspective, the range of tools provided with Tricentis NeoLoad is perhaps the widest."
"The licensing cost is very less for NeoLoad. It is user-friendly and easy to understand because they have created so many useful functionalities. When I started working with this tool, we just had to do the initial assessment about whether this tool will be able to support our daily work or not. I could easily understand it. I didn't have to search Google or watch YouTube videos. In just 15 to 20 minutes, I was able to understand the tool."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"I believe that data management and test server virtualization are things that Perforce is working on, or should be working on."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"The performance could be better. When reviewing finished cases, it sometimes takes a while for BlazeMeter to load. That has improved recently, but it's still a problem with unusually large test cases. The same goes for editing test cases. When editing test cases, it starts to take a long time to open those action groups and stuff."
"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"There is no analytical dashboard."
"Technical support is slow and wastes a lot of time, so it needs to be improved."
"The reporting side of things is really complicated. It's difficult to get out exactly what you're looking for, there are almost too many options."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
"In future releases, it would be good if extra added features for integration are added into NeoLoad."
"It needs improvement with post-production."
"Sometimes it's complicated to maintain the test cases. It's much easier than in JMeter, however. I'm not sure if this depends so much on NeoLoad, or is more based on the environment that we are testing."
"An area for improvement in Tricentis NeoLoad is its price, as it has a hefty price tag."
"While importing the scripts from backup it should not create the new variables because it has created some issues for us."
"Most people focus on HTTPS or TCP, but it would be good to have support for a variety of different protocols."
"It needs improvements in the UI. It's currently not as friendly as it should be."
