Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1

    TestComplete Load Test vs others

    Hi all,

    First of all one note: I never used a load test application.

    Then, When I find the best option to automate a web tool application (based in ASP), I found a lot of them, but I saw several cost differences.

    TestComplete is a lot cheaper than other tools like LoadRunner and QALoad.

    My question is: Is this only due to commercial reasons, or is there some other reason, like (some features, client/server emulation, ...) why TC is so much cheaper?

    Thank you so much

  2. #2

    Re: TestComplete Load Test vs others

    I can't speak for the AQA folks here but I know that, generally speaking, Automated QA apps are on the lower end price range than the bigger players on the market, but not necessarily due to lack of features.

    I'm also not a "super-tester" when it comes to load/stress/performance testing of a web app but as I understand it, TestComplete is not a whole lot different than the other tools. One advantage you get with TestComplete is that it is not ONLY a Load Testing tool. You can use the tool to automate other tests for your application. So, not only is the tool cheaper than the others, you actually get MORE.

    Just my opinion... and no, I'm not an AQA employee...
    -Robert Martin
    Automated Testing Evangelists
    TestComplete "expert"
    Definition expert - noun - Unknown drip under pressure

  3. #3

    Re: TestComplete Load Test vs others

    Thank you, Robert. I found TC load tool when I test it for functional test.
    But It's very strange that the cost is from 5 to 100. Any body know anything that other load tools can do that TC can't. If not I'm sure that in few months TC will be the only load test tool in the market. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

  4. #4

    Re: TestComplete Load Test vs others

    I found some things that I hope can help anybody. If I'm wrong please correct me.

    - TC only works as Client, not like QAL & LR that works as client and server
    - TC is more focused in Functional test, QAL & LR are focused only in Load test
    - QAL & LR allow to do load scripts
    - QAL & LR allow to find bottlenecks plus develop back orifices

  5. #5

    Re: TestComplete Load Test vs others

    Hi All,

    One of the AutomatedQA purposes is to make automated testing more popular and available not only for large corporations, but also for small companies. When TestComplete was created, it was supposed to be used for functional testing. The HTTP Load Testing feature was added later, and it is included only in the Enterprise edition. Besides that, the feature presupposes purchasing additional virtual user add-ons (TestComplete can simulate only up to 5 virtual users by default). As for the list of features, our end-users are free to evaluate a fully-functional version of TestComplete to compare it with other products and find out whether the tool meets particular business needs. If you are interested in some specific features, feel free to contact us, and we will answer your questions regarding them.
    Allen - SmartBear Support



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
BetaSoft Inc.
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:54 PM.

Copyright BetaSoft Inc.