We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and OpenText Silk Performer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools."The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to download everything myself without any IT support."
"What we call the LoadRunner analysis is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"This product is better oriented to large, enterprise-oriented organizations."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"The solution supports a number of protocols."
"Our main use case for the product was load and stress testing. It helped us put the system under stress by injecting in multiple users, such as 5,000 users."
"It is also good for reporting purposes, which would be most familiar for QC and UFT users."
"Provides the performance of load test applications and reliably on good reporting."
"A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"Third-party product integrations could be a little more slickly handled."
"OpenText needs to improve in terms of support. With the same support plan but when the product was owned by HP, support was more responsive and better coordinated."
"The cost of the solution is high and can be improved."
"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Load Testing Tools with 81 reviews while OpenText Silk Performer is ranked 10th in Load Testing Tools with 1 review. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while OpenText Silk Performer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Silk Performer writes "Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Tricentis NeoLoad, Apache JMeter and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas OpenText Silk Performer is most compared with Apache JMeter.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load 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.