"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."
"It offered us an easy to use, limited code option for end-to-end performance testing."
"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."
"Very easy to use the front end and the UI is very good."
"The most useful aspect of Tricentis NeoLoad was for the web."
"I feel that the codeless part, the dynamic value capture part is quite easy in NeoLoad compared to other tools."
"Tool for load testing and performance testing with good API support and good technical support. Tricentis NeoLoad is absolutely stable and scalable."
"The stability is okay."
"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."
"Tricentis NeoLoad could improve the terminal emulation mainframe. It is not able to use the low code or no code option. You have to code it yourself."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"There were some features that were lacking in Tricentis NeoLoad, e.g. those were more into Citrix and other complicated protocols, which were supported easily by a competitor: Micro Focus LoadRunner. We also need to look into how it integrates with other Tricentis products, because Tricentis did not have a good performance testing tool until now."
"The SAP area could be improved."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"We would like NeoLoad to be able to support more protocols. Testing can also be a little tricky at times."
"LoadRunner supports multiple protocols, whereas NeoLoad supports only three protocols. With NeoLoad, we can go for the SAP technology, web-based HTTP, and Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP). If I have to simulate .NET application-based traffic, I won't be able to do that. So, protocol support is a limitation for NeoLoad. It should support more protocols."
More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational Performance Tester is ranked 18th in Test Management Tools with 1 review while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 7 reviews. IBM Rational Performance Tester is rated 0.0, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Performance Tester writes "Supports web and mobile applications, very scalable, very stable, and wonderful support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Good licensing cost, user-friendly, and makes it easy and quick to create scripts". IBM Rational Performance Tester is most compared with Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, IBM Rational Test Workbench, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud and BlazeMeter, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, BlazeMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud and Eggplant Performance.
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.
