We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and OpenText Silk Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."It is cost-effective and simple to use."
"The solution is free. You don't need to worry about licensing costs."
"JMeter is basically the art of the entire performance testing process."
"This solution is easier to use than any other tool in the market; there is not even a requirement to learn a lot of scripting in order to use it."
"It is scalable. You can scale up to 1,000 users in JMeter. If you can put up four slave servers, you can easily ramp up to 1,000 users."
"It is very quick and user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature for us is the available information on the forums and to be able to discuss and get answers from the people that are involved in using this tool."
"We are using it just for load testing. We are using its free version, and it is scalable."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"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."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"Apache JMeter may have difficulty recognizing dynamic objects in some critical cases, which can lead to challenges in terms of object identification."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"The tool should be made a bit more robust, and better support should be made available."
"Currently, the integration pipeline is implemented by using Jenkins or a similar tool platform. These are continuous integration tools. As far as I know, integration is done by using custom scripts. It would be good if the integration with a continuous integration pipeline, like Jenkins or Hudson, can be done out of the box without using a script."
"Apache JMeter could use improvement in reporting. Currently, it isn't easy to generate reports in PDF format. While receiving reports in PDF format is possible, it requires a lot of customization. Additionally, when comparing the load test to others solutions it could improve."
"Automation is difficult in JMeter."
"JMeter should be more stable. Every time there is a new release coming up, a lot of its older functionalities or the new functionalities that are brought in are not very well-documented. It should be documented properly, and there should be proper use cases."
"Until now, JMeter is not supporting most of the protocols."
"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."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
Earn 20 points
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Performance Testing Tools with 82 reviews while OpenText Silk Test is ranked 26th in Functional Testing Tools. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while OpenText Silk Test is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Silk Test writes "Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, Katalon Studio and OpenText LoadRunner Professional, whereas OpenText Silk Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, OpenText UFT Developer, froglogic Squish and Katalon Studio.
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.