We performed a comparison between OpenText Silk Performer and Tricentis NeoLoad based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Load Testing Tools."A good monitoring tool, simple to script and easy to configure."
"The Frameworks feature is valuable. NeoLoad Web and the API are also valuable. It provides API support."
"There are several key features, including Jenkins integration, infrastructure monitoring, and results analysis."
"In my opinion, correlation of dynamic data is the most important advantage of this tool."
"The most valuable feature is flexibility, as it connects to all of the endpoints that we need it to."
"It is a good source for load, stress and performance testing."
"We appreciate that this solution is very user-friendly, even if the user does not have a lot of protocol knowledge and experience."
"There aren't other solutions as competitive as Tricentis NeoLoad when it comes to the performance side."
"The solution's setup was straightforward."
"If you have a large amount of data, the solution can struggle."
"LoadRunner offers a full protocol, whereas, with this product, only a few of the protocols are supported - not all."
"There is room for improvement with the support and community documentation as it can be difficult to find answers to questions quickly."
"Support wasn't able to solve a technical issue."
"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."
"NeoLoad can improve the correlation templates, which are specific to frameworks. There's room for improvement in that area."
"Sometimes it's complicated to maintain the test cases. It's much easier than in JMeter, however. I'm not sure if this depends so much on NeoLoad, or is more based on the environment that we are testing."
"The overall stability of the GUI should be improved. The GUI component is not stable enough. We have observed crashes several times."
"I would like to see support for auto-correlations."
OpenText Silk Performer is ranked 10th in Load Testing Tools with 1 review while Tricentis NeoLoad is ranked 3rd in Load Testing Tools with 57 reviews. OpenText Silk Performer is rated 8.0, while Tricentis NeoLoad is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText Silk Performer writes "Scripting and basic test executions are good features; configuring the workload for tests is easy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis NeoLoad writes "Supports SAP and non-SAP applications and helps identify performance issues before production deployment". OpenText Silk Performer is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and OpenText LoadRunner Professional, whereas Tricentis NeoLoad is most compared with Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, BlazeMeter and Tricentis Tosca.
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.