We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Test Workbench and LambdaTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools."This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"The most valuable features are that it's essentially on-demand, and you only focus on getting the code that needs to be executed without having to worry about the OS, hardware, etc."
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"Stability-wise, I have not experienced any downtime or other performance issues."
"The slow nature of a cloud platform was compensated with parallel testing, and now we are able to finish our testing job faster than it was before COVID."
"Geolocation testing is as straightforward as ticking checkboxes of browsers, operating systems, and countries."
"In case something goes wrong at LambdaTest end, the Support team is extremely responsive to analyze any platform-related issues."
"LambdaTest easily integrates with leading project management, bug tracking, and CI-CD tools like Jira, Asana, Jenkins, Circle CI, and more."
"It is a scalable solution."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"Mobile application testing would be helpful for us."
"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues."
"Load flow compared to other stacks needs improvement."
"Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis...There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time."
"I think Lambdatest is a valuable tool for our team and things that have room for improvement would be mobile app testing, as it can be an important addition to the tool."
"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing."
"It would be much easier for us to read the test if they provided dashboard analytics."
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational Test Workbench is ranked 36th in Test Automation Tools while LambdaTest is ranked 14th in Test Automation Tools with 18 reviews. IBM Rational Test Workbench is rated 7.6, while LambdaTest is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Test Workbench writes "Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of LambdaTest writes "Cost-effective, good integration, and parallel testing leads to good performance". IBM Rational Test Workbench is most compared with , whereas LambdaTest is most compared with BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, Katalon Studio, Perfecto and Tricentis Tosca.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.
