Tricentis NeoLoad Reviews

It’s very easy for a person without any performance testing experience to use. It was a breeze to install and start using.

Monitoring Agents, Dynamic Parameters and Automatically Recording of all the Requests and Responses.

We did not have any idea as to why our application was breaking during normal loads. NeoLoad helped us to determine the huge issues and factors which were completely hidden if not for NeoLoad.

It would be nice if they could make it so that the dynamic parameterization in the requests came back without the values from the previous responses. Also, it needs the ability to capture SQL queries that are being fired.

I've been using it for eight months.

We had scalability issues for loads over 1000 when using one Load Generator. Now we have increased the Load Generator to two.

They are very good and prompt in resolving tickets that we raise with them. They did help us in resolving certain issues over the phone call with a NeoLoad Expert.

This was our first performance testing tool.

It was very straightforward as it comes with an installer and you just need some space and a server to install it on.

We implemented it in house and my advice is to follow the installation document.

If you install it, you can have fun.

The support for HTTP, JMS, REST API, and XBAP protocols is good. NeoLoad is very user friendly and works well with HTTP and REST AO’s. It's very effective during cloud based testing and the cost is a fraction of LoadRunner. v5.1.4 introduced the JMS testing protocol which is a copy of SOAP UI. I was pleasantly surprised that with a little tweaking and support from Neotys, NeoLoad worked with XBAP applications very efficiently.

It comes with new features, notably JMS which enables us to be on top of our performance testing tool list.

The documentation for the new JMS protocol is in its initial stages and Neotys needs to update their online support documentation with more information about it.

I've been using it for over three years.

We've not experienced any deployment issues.

There were a couple of times during a load run where NeoLoad crashed out but they were due to issues with our virtual machines rather than NeoLoad.

9/10

9/10 - the Neotys support team is superb and very efficient.

I have used LoadRunner for web, web services and Siebel protocols, but running and licensing costs were very high.

It's very straightforward.

Executable binaries made life easier during the implementation and do not require any advice.

Compared to LoadRunner, NeoLoad licensing of users is very cost effective. The cost is very simple and well defined and you can check it on the Neotys site.

You should attend a three day training course to fully understand the functioanlity of NeoLoad.

Screenshots:

• The easy of flagging requests while performing manual correlation.
• Its integration with various monitoring tool.
• Ease of creation population mimicking various browser emulations and network profiles.

In the projects where we deployed NeoLoad, it helped to reduce the time taken to script workflows. Also, the ease with which load generators could be added significantly reduced the time taken to design and initiate the load tests.

The current product is very good and the roadmap which is laid out for Neoload is sound. However, they need to offer more protocol support.

I have been using this solution for about four years.

There were projects which we had to simulate more than 50,000 users and had some scalability issues which were quickly resolved with help from Neotys support.

Customer support is excellent, with a very quick turn around time for any question asked.

Traditionally we have been using HP LoadRunner, and were looking for a more cost effective solution for performance testing. JMeter was the initial choice, but the lack of support was a cause for concern.

The initial step was relatively easy with a one click installation and setup. The complexity was in learning the features of the tool. The initial learning curve was a bit steep, but once the process and steps were determined, then the way ahead was easy.

The implementation was taken care in-house. Implementation is a fairly straightforward process if the load generators and controllers are in the same subnet. It takes a bit of time to setup the network firewall rules and to open up all the necessary ports if the load generators are in various subnets.

It is fairly cost effective when compared to the cost of LoadRunner.

• Graphical test creation
• Centralized test and results repository
• License management

With the simplicity of the test design interface, little domain knowledge is required for each scripted application, so we are able to generalize all of the performance testers to the point that any tester can update and execute any script instead of having individual domain experts who may be unavailable or busy. This has allowed us to keep more scripts updated easier than ever and keep a constant flow of performance tests in the pipeline, removing some dependence on human interaction.

If there was ever a way to bring the same level of ease to advanced scripting with Javascript to make it as easy as a regular test in NeoLoad, I would love to see it.

Some type of global test scheduler where different tests could be arranged on a calendar to automatically execute would help scheduling and provide visibility into the test environment.

Tighter integration with NeoSense and perhaps TFS integration to open defects for performance issues would also be nice.

I've used it for 12 months.

We've had no issues with deployment.

There have been no stability issues.

Running very large populations on one machine would max out NIC-level capacity far before CPU/memory would provide indication of bottlenecks, but running a distributed test alleviated this issue.

8/10

8/10

We previously used HP LoadRunner, and we switched due to cost, support competence, and the scripting interface.

It's straightforward to install and configure, but complex to convert scripts from a previous product to work in NeoLoad.

We implemented it in-house.

We've gotten 20% increase in tests-per-sprint and 35% decrease in time taken to create a script. We also have cost savings of over one million dollars annually.

Purchase a few extra licenses to allow for flexibility, utilizing the team server as much as possible.

• HP LoadRunner
• JMeter
• Appvance
• Rational Performance Tester

Take the time to see what NeoLoad can do when scripted from scratch and remember that it takes a bit of time to become an expert with the advanced features. Some complex actions may require written code, but there is very little that is actually impossible to test with NeoLoad. The limit is usually a function of experience with the software.

The most valuable feature that we've found useful is that NeoLoad provides a variety of bandwidths.

I was able to use this product in the past for simulating mobile performance after recording a script over the LAN. This feature wasn't available in other testing products that I evaluated.

Neotys was extremely promising when they launched and it had features that older versions of HP LoadRunner and HP Performance Center did not (automatic correlation, for example). However with newer releases of HP ALM (especially 11.52 onward), these features were readily available with HP products.

I also ran into installation issues with NeoLoad when the installation never completed.

I've used it for over two years.

I uninstalled the product and tried to install the latest version. However, it sort of kept hanging during the installation procedure.

We've had no stability issues.

There have been no issues scaling it for our needs.

In my experience, technical support was pretty good in those times I had to contact them for issues.

It was a simple initial setup.

We implemented it through our in-house team.

Script designing and "free" network emulation are the most valuable features for us.

I have seen good productivity improvements of over 30% in script design.

Reporting needs to be better. I would like to see information such as Send Time, Receive Time, SSL, Waiting Time, and Blocking Time in my response times.

I've been using it for two years.

We've had no issues with the deployment.

There have been no stability issues.

We've had no issues scaling it for our needs.

When I've presented technical support with an issue, they're prompt in responding to me.

I had been using HP LoadRunner, Apache JMeter, SOASTA CloudTest, BlazeMeter and Rational Performance Tester. I chose this because when it comes to mobile HTTP load testing, Neoload helps script quicker.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We implemented it with our in-house team.

Compared to other tools in the market, this is priced moderately. However, I see a lot of short term performance activities, and the license costs are higher in comparison. Most of the time, I just use JMeter in such cases.

Go ahead and give it a try.

• Flexible license model
• Cloud integration
• Native mobile application testing

I had a requirement to test a mobile application for corporate that is used by users across the globe. I needed to do the test setup quickly to generate load across the region, and to do so with a solution that was cheaper than what we had. A NeoLoad license of four days with load generation from the cloud across regions helped to do the setup in three to four days and perform the testing.

It needs to support SAP GUI-based applications, which forms 60-70% of our portfolio, as well as Windows (client install) and Citrix-based applications.

I've used it for two years.

We had no issues deploying it.

There have been no stability issues.

We tested up to 1,000 users across four regions - North America, EMEA Latin America, and Asia-Pacific. It scaled sufficiently for us to be able to do that cross-regional testing.

It's excellent as the support is always available and helps us to troubleshoot any issues during execution with live support.

We were using HP Performance Center in-house for the previous six years. NeoLoad was tried as there was a need to test mobile applications with load generated from the cloud.

The initial setup is straightforward for both an in-house and a cloud one.

The implementation was done by an in-house team.

The licensing model is very flexible which supports a broad range of budgets, from small projects to enterprise-level setups.

Choose this if your portfolio is predominantly web and mobile. You need to reconsider if your portfolio has many SAP GUI-based applications.

• Easy correlations
• User-friendly GUI
• All components in one place

It helped us to improve the performance of all our applications.

Almost everything about NewLoad looks good, but I would like to have an indication of the variables for error messages appearing in the error tab. This would help us identify the users triggering the errors.

I've been using it for a year.

We've had no deployment issues.

There have been no issues with the stability.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

In my experience, customer service is good.

The times that I've contacted technical support have been good experiences.

I worked with HP LoadRunner in my previous projects. I started using NeoLoad when I joined a project that was already utilizing it.

I wasn't involved, but my colleagues have said that the initial setup is straightforward.

An in-house team implemented NeoLoad for the current project.

Compared to HP LoadRunner, NeoLoad is cheaper.

It's a good tool to use if you are not willing to spend lots of money on HP LoadRunner licenses.