We performed a comparison between GoCD and Jenkins based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Build Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most notable aspect is its user interface, which we find to be user-friendly and straightforward for deploying and comprehending pipelines. We have the ability to create multiple pipelines, and in addition to that, the resource consumption is impressive."
"The UI is colorful."
"Permission separations mean that we can grant limited permissions for each team or team member."
"Distributed execution of build and test jobs."
"Jenkins is very stable."
"Has enabled full automation of the company."
"Jenkins is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable aspect of Jenkins is pipeline customization. Jenkins provides a declarative pipeline as well as a scripted pipeline. The scripted pipeline uses a programming language. You can customize it to your needs, so we use Jenkins because other solutions like Travis and Spinnaker don't allow much customization."
"The automated elements are easy to use and you can put them into your server."
"We significantly reduced build times of large projects (more than 80k lines of Scala code) using build time on Jenkins as a time sample. It reduced the developer write-test-commit cycle time, and increased productivity."
"Jenkins is the most widely used development tool, so there are many plugins and it's easy to integrate. There is a large user base to provide community support, which I find very valuable. If I need to find a better way to do something, I can always get help from the community. Automation is about thinking outside of the box, and other users are constantly adding new plugins."
"The aspect that requires attention is the user management component. When integrating with BitLabs and authenticating through GitLab, there are specific features we desire. One important feature is the ability to import users directly from GitLab, along with their respective designations, and assign appropriate privileges based on that information. Allocating different privileges to users is a time-consuming process for us."
"The tool must be more user-friendly."
"The documentation really should be improved by including real examples and more setup cases."
"Jenkins could improve by adding the ability to edit test automation and make time planning better because it is difficult. It should be easier to do."
"This solution could be improved by removing the storage of unnecessary data such as the history of test deployments that were unsuccessful."
"This solution would be improved with the inclusion of an Artifactory (Universal artifact repository manager)."
"The upgrades need improvement."
"The enterprise version is less stable than the open-source version."
"Jenkins is an old product, and we encounter performance issues and slow response. Also, some of the plugins are not stable."
"The solution could improve by having more advanced integrations."
"The UI must be more user-friendly."
GoCD is ranked 10th in Build Automation with 6 reviews while Jenkins is ranked 2nd in Build Automation with 83 reviews. GoCD is rated 7.6, while Jenkins is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of GoCD writes "User-friendly, useful multiple pipeline capabilities, and low resource consumption". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jenkins writes "A highly-scalable and stable solution that reduces deployment time and produces a significant return on investment". GoCD is most compared with GitLab, Microsoft Azure DevOps, GitHub Actions, Tekton and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, whereas Jenkins is most compared with GitLab, Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline, IBM Rational Build Forge and Harness. See our GoCD vs. Jenkins report.
See our list of best Build Automation vendors.
We monitor all Build Automation 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.