IBM Rational Performance Tester vs Selenium HQ comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Performance Tester and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Test Management Tools Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far.""It can support both web applications and mobile applications, and in certain cases, it can also support testing of desktop applications or software-based applications. You can write web applications, mobile applications, and software-based applications."

More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pros →

"Selenium has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only.""It supports many external plugins, and because it's a Java-based platform, it's language-independent. You can use Java, C#, Python, etc.""It's available open-source and free. To install it, I just have to download it. It also doesn't require too many hardware resources compared to Micro Focus.""It supports most of the actions that a user would do on a website.""In general, I would say that the API set is the most valuable feature.""The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well.""Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is picking up and entering values from web pages.""I like its simplicity."

More Selenium HQ Pros →

Cons
"The solution is not easily scalable. If you want to extend the solution, you need to purchase a different kind of license. You also have to work with the IBM team to assist in scaling.""There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies."

More IBM Rational Performance Tester Cons →

"The installation could be simplified, it is a bit difficult to install.""I continuously see failures in threads when it is running in parallel.""If they can integrate more recording features, like UFT, it would be helpful for automation, but it's not necessary. They can also add a few more reporting features for advanced reporting.""It would be better if it accommodated non-techy end-users. I think it's still a product for developers. That's why it's not common for end-users, and especially for RPA activities or tasks. It's hard to automate tasks for end-users. If it will be easier, more user-friendly, and so on, perhaps it can be more interesting for this kind of user.""It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly.""It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage.""It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background.""Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."

More Selenium HQ Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It is much cheaper than Micro Focus LoadRunner. We need perpetual licenses. Support is included in the first sale. After that, you need to renew support every year."
  • More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It is free to use."
  • "There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
  • "It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license."
  • "Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
  • "It is free."
  • "This product is open source and free. That was a huge deciding factor for us getting into it."
  • "We are satisfied with the pricing."
  • "It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
  • More Selenium HQ Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer:Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate… more »
    Top Answer:Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
    Ranking
    24th
    Views
    123
    Comparisons
    91
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    4th
    Views
    5,363
    Comparisons
    4,586
    Reviews
    33
    Average Words per Review
    410
    Rating
    8.1
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Rational Performance Tester
    SeleniumHQ
    Learn More
    SeleniumHQ
    Video Not Available
    Overview
    IBM Rational Performance Tester is a performance testing solution that validates the scalability of web and server applications. Rational Performance Tester identifies the presence and cause of system performance bottlenecks and reduces load testing complexity.

    Selenium HQ is an umbrella project that includes a number of tools and frameworks that allow for web browser automation. In particular, Selenium offers a framework for the W3C WebDriver specification, a platform- and language-neutral coding interface that works with all of the main web browsers.

    Selenium is a toolset for automating web browsers that uses the best methods available to remotely control browser instances and simulate a user's interaction with the browser. It enables users to mimic typical end-user actions, such as typing text into forms, choosing options from drop-down menus, checking boxes, and clicking links in documents. Additionally, it offers a wide range of other controls, including mouse movement, arbitrary JavaScript execution, and much more.

    Although Selenium HQ is generally used for front-end website testing, it is also a browser user agent library. The interfaces are universal in their use, which enables composition with other libraries to serve your purpose.

    The source code for Selenium is accessible under the Apache 2.0 license. The project is made possible by volunteers who have kindly committed hundreds of hours to the development and maintenance of the code.

    Selenium HQ Tools

    These three main Selenium HQ tools have powerful capabilities:

    • WebDriver: If you are just starting out with desktop or mobile website test automation, you will be using WebDriver APIs. WebDriver controls the browser and executes tests using the automation APIs that browser vendors provide. This gives the impression that a real person is using the browser. Because WebDriver's API does not need to be compiled alongside application code, it is not intrusive. As a result, you can test the same application that you push live.

    • IDE: Develop your Selenium test cases using an IDE (integrated development environment). The most effective way to create test cases is to utilize this simple Chrome and Firefox extension. IDE uses Selenium commands that are already in use to record user activity in the browser with parameters set by the context of the element. This is an excellent approach to learning Selenium script syntax and will save you time.

    • Grid: You can run test cases on several machines and operating systems with Selenium Grid. The local end controls how the test cases are triggered, and the remote end automatically runs the test cases after they are triggered.

    Reviews from Real Users

    Selenium HQ stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Two major ones are its driver interface and its speed. PeerSpot users take note of the advantages of these features in their reviews:


    Avijit B., an automation tester at a tech services company, writes of the solution, “The driver interface is really useful. When we implement the Selenium driver interface, we can easily navigate through all of the pages and sections of an app, including performing things like clicking, putting through SendKeys, scrolling down, tagging, and all the other actions we need to test for in an application.”

    Another PeerSpot reviewer, a software engineer at a financial services firm, notes, “Selenium is the fastest tool compared to other competitors. It can run on any language, like Java, Python, C++, and .NET. So we can test any application on Selenium, whether it's mobile or desktop."

    Sample Customers
    andagon, Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon
    BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Government29%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Construction Company14%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Government13%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm25%
    Computer Software Company22%
    Retailer10%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise33%
    Large Enterprise44%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise77%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business30%
    Midsize Enterprise27%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise68%
    Buyer's Guide
    Test Management Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM Rational Performance Tester is ranked 24th in Test Management Tools while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. IBM Rational Performance Tester is rated 7.6, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Performance Tester writes "We can edit captured transactions and organize them by those for which we require performance metrics, but it lacks a set of manuals or guides that would take out some guess work". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". IBM Rational Performance Tester is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Telerik Test Studio, Worksoft Certify, Tricentis Tosca and OpenText Silk Test.

    We monitor all Test Management 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.