We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."Probably its prime advantage, it provides a centralized location for testing."
"It offers easy integration with third-party tools like Dynatrace, Splunk, etc."
"The most valuable aspect of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the overall support it has for a lot of different applications and defined domains."
"What I like most in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the comparison between two different exhibitions which gives value to my company. I also like that the solution is user-friendly, especially in terms of making specific changes. For example, in the past, you can't see the changes when you upload scripts into the Performance Center, but now, it has that visibility, so whenever you want, you can change the script in the Performance Center. I also like that Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the only tool you can utilize for all your needs, even for different protocols and scripting. The solution also has the latest features, for example, networkability, where it can, within the UI, follow the waterfall model. You can use the insights in the Performance Center of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise to address or test URLs that usually take up much time."
"We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with."
"For me, LoadRunner stands out, especially with its reporting capabilities, the graphs that can be generated, and the unique feature of measuring our application's response alongside our infrastructure metrics, such as CPU, memory, or disk usage, all presented in graph form. This is something other applications struggle to match."
"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"It is also good for reporting purposes, which would be most familiar for QC and UFT users."
"The whole suite is made for .NET development."
"The most valuable feature has been to store all our packages in one place including SSIS packages, SQL tables, TFS and SSR."
"The ability to quickly make your own components has been valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Visual Studio Test Professional is its ease of use."
"Easy to use and easily scalable."
"Customization is the most powerful feature of this product."
"It's great for the development of .NET."
"The stability has always been very good."
"The solution is expensive."
"Canned reports are always a challenge and a question with customers because customers want to see sexy reports."
"Currently, when we try open LRE we encounter cookie banner issues. However, I'm not sure if it is within the enterprise solution or with the vendors."
"They need to focus on minimizing the cost."
"OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting."
"More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test."
"New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration."
"The cost of the solution is high and can be improved."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
"The price could be improved."
"Visual Studio Test Professional needs to improve its stability."
"It is not good in terms of performance. When you open Visual Studio, you have to wait for a while to process your code. It uses a lot of resources and has a lot of features. If we could disable some of the features, it would be lighter and faster to use. Nowadays, for some of the projects, we use VS Code for JavaScript or Python. VS Code is very light and easy to use, whereas, in Visual Studio, we have to wait because it takes time to compile or run a project. It has a lot of competitors in terms of performance, such as Intelligent ID. Intelligent ID is very easy to use. It has many features, and it is lighter to use than Visual Studio. In terms of error handling, sometimes, it shows an error before you finish your code, which can be improved. It would be good if it has a version for Linux. I use VS Code on Linux, but I am not sure if Visual Studio has a version for Linux."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a little pricey."
"Its UI could be better."
"The solution's documentation could be improved because it keeps disappearing from the solution."
"In Visual Studio we still don't have anything which can pinpoint memory leaks on a certain code line."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 48 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and OpenText UFT One, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText LoadRunner Professional.
We monitor all Performance 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.