We performed a comparison between Eggplant Performance and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."We don't have a big team of people that can watch the dials and check that everything is okay. We're doing a lot of the monitoring of our website and our product at the side of the desk. We need a solution that does a lot for us, and that's what Eggplant does."
"We find the solution stable and scalable."
"It is not a conventional test automation tool. It uses optical character recognition (OCR) to identify objects. It makes it the best in the class."
"The tool has highly detailed debugging features."
"The user interface is very friendly."
"The ability to quickly make your own components has been valuable."
"The whole suite is made for .NET development."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a scalable solution."
"The solution is very stable; there's nothing in relation to stability to complain about."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a very scalable solution."
"One of the best documentation in the world."
"Performance is one key area for improvement. It can be slower compared to other tools I've used."
"I'd like to see the ability to integrate the user experience through device forms like AWS device forms or source labs."
"Visual Studio Test Professional should include more automation."
"It is not good in terms of performance. When you open Visual Studio, you have to wait for a while to process your code. It uses a lot of resources and has a lot of features. If we could disable some of the features, it would be lighter and faster to use. Nowadays, for some of the projects, we use VS Code for JavaScript or Python. VS Code is very light and easy to use, whereas, in Visual Studio, we have to wait because it takes time to compile or run a project. It has a lot of competitors in terms of performance, such as Intelligent ID. Intelligent ID is very easy to use. It has many features, and it is lighter to use than Visual Studio. In terms of error handling, sometimes, it shows an error before you finish your code, which can be improved. It would be good if it has a version for Linux. I use VS Code on Linux, but I am not sure if Visual Studio has a version for Linux."
"Sometimes, the solution hangs, so its performance could be improved."
"Sometimes Visual Studio is slow. It uses a lot of resources like memory and processing power. You should optimize the performance by only installing what you need on your machine. Don't install unnecessary things that will slow your machine."
"We would like to be able to easily integrate this solution with our continuous integration tools, such as Jenkins."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Visual Studio Test Professional could improve by having better integration with external databases."
"The solution can improve the startup time."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Eggplant Performance is ranked 15th in Performance Testing Tools with 4 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. Eggplant Performance is rated 7.8, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Eggplant Performance writes "Offers unique object identification, ideal for UI layer regression automation but limited scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". Eggplant Performance is most compared with Appium, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, Tricentis Tosca and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and TestRail.
We monitor all Performance 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.