IBM DevOps Test Performance helps software testing teams test earlier and more frequently by shifting testing left. IBM DevOps Test Performance validates the scalability of web and server applications, identifies the presence and cause of system performance bottlenecks and reduces load testing. Software testing teams can execute performance tests that analyze the impact of load on applications.
N/A
QAComplete
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
QAComplete is a performance testing tool from SmartBear. The vendor says QAComplete was built from the ground-up to be an easy-to-use test case management tool, adapting to the user's existing processes and empowering users to manage all of their manual and automated tests with ease, while reporting on all test results in one central location. The vendor's goal is for QAComplete to allows users to spend less time managing tests and focus on what they do best; making great…
Go for IBM RPT if: 1. You're testing a Java-based Web application with HTTP protocol 2. You wanted to distribute the load across machines easily 3. Your team is in learning phase/not really introduced to a wide range of performance testing tools Do not go for IBM RPT if: 1. You wanted to test REST or any other advanced protocols 2. Your system under test demands a very high user load 3. Your application is written in .NET or any other platform except Java.
Memory utilization could have been improved.(Eats up system's RAM)! It may crash if a test is conducted with the heavy load if adequate RAM is not available in the VM/host machine.
Licensing could have been made simpler. IBM's licensing method is difficult to follow.
Support for protocols other than HTTP. Not really up to the current trend.
I gave QAComplete this rating because though I do feel that it is a powerful tool, it's definitely not designed for the everyday user. Obviously the target demographic is QA specialists who should be team members that are very technical and methodical in their approaches. However, for the rest of the team, it can often time prove difficult to navigate. Also, the UI is in need of a serious refresh.
I have not had to work with their customer service directly yet. Our client has been utilizing this tool for years, so I would assume that the support they have received would be good enough to keep them wanting to continue to use the product.
Cost/Licensing: While JMeter is an opensource testing tool from Apache, compared to IBM RPT and HP LoadRunner, RPT is much cheaper than Loadrunner. Functionality:JMeter provides basic functionalities which are adequate for performance testing, however advanced features are not available (such as load testing with GUI, reporting is very basic etc.). But when it comes to Loadrunner, it offers very broad features and supports a variety of protocols. So in this category, Loadrunner is a winner, but RPT is better than JMeter. Ease of operating:JMeter is easy compared to LoadRunner, but it has old GUI and look and feel is not that great to understand. Also, most of the things are to be done in a command line, non-GUI mode. While LoadRunner is very advanced with many options, which also confusing sometimes. But RPT, on the other hand, maintains a balance between simplicity and offering of different features. So winner: RPT.
We had used FogBugz and Freshdesk for quite some time. I hadn't been exposed to QAComplete until recently during a project with one of our clients, but we are already starting to see the superior benefits of this product. Once you wrap your head around the interface and navigate to the bug reports, it becomes a very powerful tool.
From our side, it's been very easy to pick up on bugs reported by our clients. It's a great ROI for the cost as they are fairly minimal in comparison to other QA software.
I think a negative impact can be the administration of QA items. It definitely feels a bit bogged down.
My last negative would be that I don't believe it syncs in any way with the Atlassian software suite. I could be wrong on this but manual entry from system to system can be daunting at times.
