Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Enterprise Perform...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (5th), Load Testing Tools (5th)
OpenText Silk Test
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (20th), Regression Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 5.6%, down 7.1% compared to last year.
OpenText Silk Test, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 1.0% mindshare, down 1.3% since last year.
Performance Testing Tools
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
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. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
SrinivasPakala - PeerSpot reviewer
Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available
While we are performance testing the engineering key, we need to come up with load strategies to commence the test. We'll help to monitor the test, and afterward, we'll help to make all the outcomes, and if they are new, we'll do lots and lots of interpretation and analysis across various servers, to look at response times, and impact. For example, whatever the observations we had during the test, we need to implement it. We'll have to help to catch what exactly is the issues were, and we'll help to see how they can be reduced. Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are. The solution needs better monitoring, especially of CPU.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is mostly user-friendly and usable."
"IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center."
"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."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"For me, the test coverage and the performance and load testing aspects are valuable."
"The solution supports a number of protocols."
"You can test a huge variety of applications, not just web-based systems, but SAP, Oracle, web services, pretty much anything out in the market place, but it's mobile-based testing."
"The most valuable part of the product is the way you can scale the basic testing easily."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."
 

Cons

"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC."
"New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration."
"The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools."
"Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format."
"I have seen some users report some issues, but I have personally not had any issues."
"I know there are integrations with continuous testing. It's got tie-ins to some of the newer tools to allow continuous testing. I'd love to see us not have to customize it, but for it to be out of the box."
"For such an experienced team as mine, who have been with the product for over ten years, sometimes working with technical support is not that easy."
"On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on."
"The pricing could be improved."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive."
"We are content with the pricing and find it to be reasonable in terms of value for money."
"It is a bit expensive, especially for smaller organizations, but over-all it can save you money."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."
"They have a much more practical pricing model now."
"We used the Professional version and then moved to the enterprise version. We have subscribed to 1000 user licenses. The tool will be super expensive if we take up 5,000 user licenses. We have to limit ourselves on testing."
"This solution can be expensive."
"I give the cost a one out of ten."
"Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and while I think that the price is quite reasonable I am not allowed to share those details."
"We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
850,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
19%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and RPT being cheaper makes them attractive. The high cost of LoadRunner, in contras...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
While I don't see any issues with LoadRunner's functionality, the cost of the tool is a major factor. Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despi...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Silk Test?
The pricing depends on the license used. The pricing is similar to others in the market.
What is your primary use case for Silk Test?
The product is used for manual, functional, and performance testing. I'm using the tool for loading data into ERP systems.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, Perforce and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: April 2025.
850,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.