We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Get our free report covering Micro Focus, Micro Focus, Micro Focus, and other competitors of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. Updated: January 2022.
564,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise alternatives and competitors

Patrik Badkar
Technical Lead at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Good licensing cost, user-friendly, and makes it easy and quick to create scripts
Pros and Cons
  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We used it for putting the load on the system. For example, for a big sale of an online marketplace, we created the scripts with performance testing tools such as Neotys and LoadRunner. We used to search for a product and add it to the cart. We used to capture all this traffic through these tools, and then, we used to do the real-time testing. So, we used to simulate the real-world user scenario. For example, if the company was expecting around 20,000 users on a specific day, we used to simulate the volume of 20,000 users on the application. 

The deployment model depends on a client's requirements and licensing. If we have a sufficient budget, we always go for the SaaS model. If we have a limitation of licensing, then we prefer to go for on-premises deployment. We usually need to get support from the admin team to set up everything. We used to take care of this aspect so that the support team will be able to do things on our behalf, such as setting up things in their environment.

How has it helped my organization?

We can quickly do scripting with NeoLoad, which makes it easier to give timelines and meet them. We can easily tell a client that within this much time, we can provide the end-to-end scripts, and we'll be able to do the execution along with all the activities. 

What is most valuable?

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.

We can easily do scripting with NeoLoad. We just have to understand the basic functionality to create a script. There is not that much effort that we have to put in. If I have to transfer knowledge to a new person or a beginner, he will also be able to pick it up quickly. 

What needs improvement?

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.

One issue that we faced was that multiple users weren't able to work on the same application. We used to create multiple scripts based on the application and based on the projects, and then we used to integrate all of them in a single place. With NeoLoad, if you have to do this activity, to import a script, one user has to log off, and the second user has to copy the script and improve it, which is a time-consuming activity. These are the things that can block any further activity.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with this solution for 18 months.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I would rate it a nine out of 10 in terms of scalability. It is currently being used extensively. My organization is huge, and we have an employee count of more than 300,000. I wouldn't be able to provide the exact count, but for my project, 20 people are using this tool.

How are customer service and support?

They usually clarify any queries or issues within three hours. They usually come back to us within three hours, which is as per our SLA, so that's good. I would rate them an eight out of 10.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, we were using Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. It is still in use. We haven't completely removed it. We switched because of the licensing and the time taken to create a script.

Neotys has taken some references from LoadRunner to create NeoLoad. So, in terms of functionality, NeoLoad and LoadRunner are quite the same.

The licensing cost of NeoLoad is lesser than LoadRunner. LoadRunner supports a higher number of protocols than NeoLoad. LoadRunner has more protocols for interacting with the application than NeoLoad. So, there are multiple things that we can simulate with LoadRunner, such as a desktop application or traffic for a banking domain.

If I have to create a script in LoadRunner, it usually takes around six hours, but if I do the same thing in Neotys, it usually takes around one and a half hours to complete everything. So, we can provide a deadline for deploying a script. Time is money, so NeoLoad is better in terms of time.

How was the initial setup?

It is straightforward. You don't need much understanding from the installation perspective. You just need to download the .exe and install it. You just need the license, and if you are going for the trial version, you just upload the license. If you are going for a business license, you just have to tie up with them and reach an agreement. That's it. 

It is a one-day thing. One day is enough to complete the installation and the setup.

What about the implementation team?

It was an in-house job. In terms of maintenance, we usually have an admin team and a security team to put patches, etc.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Its licensing cost is very less.

What other advice do I have?

If you are dealing only with web HTTP, you can definitely go ahead with this solution because time is money. 

I would rate NeoLoad an eight out of 10.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
reviewer1329360
Performance Architect at Kohl's
Real User
Top 20
Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase
Pros and Cons
  • "NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
  • "The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."

What is our primary use case?

I have used NetStorm primarily for load generation to do load and stress tests on the desktop and mobile platforms of Kohls.com. I was able to generate high load with NetStorm which helped identify the performance bottlenecks of the applications in the project phase itself. NetStorm script can be generated on any environment and can be replayed to run load test on different environments. It has great features like Runlogic, autocorrelation, and monitoring capability associated inside it.

How has it helped my organization?

NetStorm had made Kohls.com very stable in the ATG platform as well as a cloud platform that Kohls didn't have any issues during the major holiday season like Thanksgiving, Black Friday and Cyber Monday. NetStorm had been used to test each component of our application stack to its capacity and made sure Kohls.com site is always performing fast for the customers. We do breakpoint tests of each component using NetStorm and then perform the integrated solution performance test by running load, stress, and endurance tests.

What is most valuable?

NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage. NetStorm has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase. One more great functionality is the ability to control the load runtime by increasing or decreasing the virtual users or pausing the users to keep on repeating the transactions without exiting.

What needs improvement?

The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs. Integration with APM and log monitoring tools is good and easy but the user interface of the customization also needs improvement. 

One more feature which needs improvement are the ready reports. Its reports have great features but need to be customized which is not easy for a normal user. So ready reports should be given with templates which can just be used out of the box.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using NetStorm for the past eight years and it is a great load generator tool.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

NetStorm is a highly stable product. All the features of the product can be used with no issues.  

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

NetStorm is having the capacity to scale high and generate more load using a single machine. One single NetStorm can be used to do a load or stress testing of multiple components. If you want load generation from multiple geo-locations, you can switch to the NetCloud load generator of the same organization.

How are customer service and technical support?

Customer service at Cavisson is 24 hours a day. Their support is so impressive as they respond within no time for any issue faced. They give utmost priority to the client and help us overcome the problems.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We have used multiple load generating tools before moving to NetStorm. NetStorm gave us the flexibility to generate load to different components differently using its VUser arrival rate models. Also, features like run logic progress, scenario progress, runtime comparison gave us more in-depth of performance bottlenecks.

How was the initial setup?

NetStorm setup is pretty straightforward and easy. You just need to runt he setup file given which can take care of setting all the configurations required. 

What about the implementation team?

Implementation was done along with the Vendor team. They are experts in implementing and servicing their suite of products. The team that implemented it in Kohls is highly skilled and confident.

What was our ROI?

We use NetStorm daily for doing load or stress tests and achieve capturing the performance bottlenecks of the applications during project level testing itself.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

NetStorm setup is so easy. It can be installed on any Linux or Unix box or windows machine on-Prem or cloud. I'm not so into the pricing of the product but heard that it is competitive and less when compared to other load generating tools. A single license of NetStorm can generate a high load to test multiple components at the same time.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We have evaluated different tools like Load Runner, Silk Performer but NetStorm and its company's product suite gives more integrated load generating, monitoring and analyzing capability.

What other advice do I have?

It's a great load generating tool with integrated monitoring capability. The company has a highly talented client support to provide their services round the clock.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Google
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Quality Assurance Test Manager at a printing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Cost-effective and straightforward to deploy, but the reporting needs to be improved
Pros and Cons
  • "The recording and playback functionality is helpful."
  • "The reporting is not very good."

What is our primary use case?

When I was last using JMeter, we were simulating 200 concurrent users and evaluating performance based on transaction times. We were defining SLAs based on the results.

Essentially, we created load scenarios and testing different ones using different workload models.

What is most valuable?

The recording and playback functionality is helpful.

What needs improvement?

The reporting is not very good.

When we run with multiple users, it takes a lot of memory.

With respect to the recording and playback functionality, the auto-correlation parameterization is not easy and should be improved.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Apache JMeter for about four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

There are issues with stability when running with multiple users because it consumes a lot of memory.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is fine, although it is important to remember that JMeter doesn't run on its own. It needs to work with load-generations such as BlazeMeter. LoadRunner is the same in that you need a cloud-based infrastructure to run it.

How are customer service and technical support?

There is no official support. There is a forum where you can ask questions and they respond to you, but the technical support that we have with LoadRunner or NeoLoad is not available.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used many similar solutions in the past such as New Relic, AppDynamics, NeoLoad, and Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise.

JMeter is not as good as LoadRunner or NeoLoad, and it isn't as easy to use, but it's okay because there is no cost. LoadRunner is too expensive, in my opinion. NeoLoad is cheaper, although not significantly.

From what I have seen, many companies are adopting JMeter because it's free. Especially in Canada, using JMeter seems to be the new trend. Some companies are choosing NeoLoad over LoadRunner because it is easier, faster, and cheaper. Whatever they need to do can be completed quicker. The main problem with NeoLoad is that obtaining resources is harder.

Given all of the choices, my preference would be to implement NeoLoad.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward. I would not say that it is complex and if you already have the file downloaded then it will only take about half an hour to deploy.

What about the implementation team?

I took care of the deployment myself.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I was using the free version of the software.

What other advice do I have?

My advice for anybody who is considering JMeter is to just install it and try it. Creating scripts is a different process when you compare it to LoadRunner or Neoload. There is different terminology compare to these two products, so if somebody has not used JMeter then it may seem difficult at first.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
IT Specialist, ITE at a government with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing
Pros and Cons
  • "Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use it for web-based traffic. It is on-premises. The load generators of the test drivers are virtual machines. We are using the second to the latest version.

What is most valuable?

Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench. 

What needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for about three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable for the most part. More of my issues are related to virtual infrastructure impact than anything else.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis.

What other advice do I have?

The only real issue I have is that it is limited in its use. If it fits your usage, it is awesome.

I would rate IBM Rational Test Workbench a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Get our free report covering Micro Focus, Micro Focus, Micro Focus, and other competitors of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise. Updated: January 2022.
564,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.