No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

BrowserStack vs TestProject [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

BrowserStack
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (5th), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
TestProject [EOL]
Average Rating
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

RM
Managing Technical Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Cross-platform testing has accelerated releases and now needs smarter AI-driven test creation
The best features that BrowserStack offers include the ability to run manual and automated tests on real devices. We can create bugs, integrate it with other platforms like Jira or Azure, and use self-healing scripts with Selenium. We also have the test runs for different versions or with different frameworks, not just Selenium but with Playwright as well. Additionally, there are real-time dashboards and notifications sent when tests fail or when we need screenshots or recordings of test executions, and we can easily integrate this into our pipelines. BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by providing an out-of-the-box solution for whole test executions across different projects for our automobile customers. We have worked on around twenty to thirty projects, and the need for a stable, customizable single test execution platform that supports different platforms has been met. It has helped manage the entire quality assurance of the product efficiently. The measurable improvements due to BrowserStack include a significant efficiency gain, allowing the whole team to collaborate on testing and communicate faster. Also, the easier integration with project management tools has been beneficial. The documentation of findings has improved, which helps us share insights with different project stakeholders.
Ashu Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior quality analyst at Lalli
An easy-to-use tool that saves time and functions within a limited budget
The solution's reporting system should be clearer and easier to understand for a layperson. I and some other experts may be able to understand the solution's reporting system, but a layperson won't understand it. For a layperson, the solution should be easy to use. Price-wise, TestProject is an expensive product. The product's current price should be lowered to attract potential customers.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"More than a feature, it was the hardware support that we were able to get through the interfaces, and this helped us address a very rare requirement that had come up within our end customer's stack."
"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."
"For BrowserStack, it's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"BrowserStack has helped us with automating our test cases by reducing the time by almost 60%."
"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
"The integration is very good."
"The product support for different OS and mobile devices is awesome."
"The device farm is one of the positive impacts we have seen from using BrowserStack."
"The product has a very good record-and-play functionality."
"One of the valuable features the solution offers is the chance to be able to perform automatic tests by recording, and to create them without having coding knowledge."
"Ability to carry out automatic testing without having coding knowledge."
"The script-less part of it was good for novice users."
"The ease of web and mobile functional testing is pretty easy on TestProject."
"The automation and AI are very good."
"Since implementing this solution, our code management has been reduced by 40% to 60%."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
 

Cons

"I would like application performance improvement to be better as, for me, it looked a bit slow."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"I think false positives are an area where BrowserStack can improve, as I have often seen things working fine on actual devices, but on BrowserStack devices, issues arise due to network slowness or AWS region connectivity problems that cause lag."
"BrowserStack is very expensive and they keep increasing their cost, which is absolutely ridiculous, especially when someone like LambdaTest is coming through for literal thousands of dollars less, with the same services."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."
"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"The solution is slow."
"TestProject needs better support for integration with other products to provide a better overall solution for test planning and test data management."
"In an upcoming release, there should be a SaaS offering available."
"Difficult trying to configure on more than one browser."
"I have had some difficulty trying to configure it on several browsers."
"The support is a weak point since they discontinued the tool."
"A company would not be able to scale with just this solution."
"I and some other experts may be able to understand the solution's reporting system, but a layperson won't understand it."
"Technical support is an area they need to work on, they are too slow to resolve issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"The price is fine."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"The solution is free."
"Price-wise, TestProject is an expensive product...With TestProject, there is a need to pay a certain amount towards its licensing costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,125 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
Improvements for BrowserStack could include better usability when working under a private network or a VPN, since it can be challenging to access restricted URLs. There are times when running an au...
What is your primary use case for BrowserStack?
In the start of my career, I performed functional testing on mobile devices and web applications, and I used BrowserStack for testing web applications and mobile applications for one year. My main ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
IBM, Wix, Flir, Payoneer
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, OpenText and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: May 2026.
900,125 professionals have used our research since 2012.