AWS Device Farm vs. Micro Focus LoadRunner

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
AWS Device Farm
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
AWS Device Farm is a mobile application performance testing application that provides real-time automated testing and reproduction of issues, simulating and testing issues that may occur on a variety of platforms (e.g. iPhone or Samsung mobile device, or multiple operations systems, etc).
$0.01
per instance minute
Micro Focus LoadRunner
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Micro Focus LoadRunner (formerly HP LoadRunner) is a load and performance testing tool acquired by Micro Focus from Hewlett-Packard Enterprise.N/A
Pricing
AWS Device FarmMicro Focus LoadRunner
Editions & Modules
Pay as You Go - Desktop Browsers
$0.005
per instance minute
Pay-As-You-Go
$0.17
per device minute
Private Devices
$200.00
per month
Unlimited Testing
$250.00
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
AWS Device FarmMicro Focus LoadRunner
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Features
AWS Device FarmMicro Focus LoadRunner
Load Testing
Comparison of Load Testing features of Product A and Product B
AWS Device Farm
-
Ratings
Micro Focus LoadRunner
8.4
6 Ratings
1% below category average
End to end performance management00 Ratings9.06 Ratings
Integrated performance data00 Ratings10.06 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility00 Ratings9.06 Ratings
Real time monitoring00 Ratings6.15 Ratings
Automated anomaly detection00 Ratings8.05 Ratings
Best Alternatives
AWS Device FarmMicro Focus LoadRunner
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 9.0 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 9.0 out of 10
JMeter
JMeter
Score 8.6 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 9.0 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 8.5 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
AWS Device FarmMicro Focus LoadRunner
Likelihood to Recommend
9.3
(4 ratings)
9.0
(7 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(2 ratings)
3.0
(2 ratings)
User Testimonials
AWS Device FarmMicro Focus LoadRunner
Likelihood to Recommend
Amazon AWS
AWS Device Farm is perfect for small teams who don't have enough resources to conduct large scale testing scenarios or even large teams who would like an easier time with testing on various devices. [AWS] Device Farm makes it very easy to interact with a multitude of devices right from the browser.
Read full review
Micro Focus
Micro Focus LoadRunner and its suite of tools, specifically VuGen works wonderfully for us for all web, http/https and web service calls. We've been able to build tests for near any scenario we need with relative ease. As long as we have crafted up requirements for our scenarios / scripts to managed scope, we've had high success working with scripting and data driving. Our main tests are web service calls - typically chained together to form a full scenario with transactions measuring the journey or a similar (measure along the way) journey through a browser. For web services we will use VuGen and browser we've shifted to Tru Client I have had little-to-no experience scripting against a thick client where a ui-driven test would be required. I know its possible but quite costly due to the need to run the actual desktop client to drive tests. We've been fortunate enough to leverage http calls to represent client traffic.
Read full review
Pros
Amazon AWS
  • Integration with CI/CD Pipeline
  • Diversity in Real Devices over the Cloud
  • Pay as you go option
  • Reproduce Issues and easily collect all kinds of logs
Read full review
Micro Focus
  • It can simulate multiple users at the same time and help understand the performance.
  • It can generate excellent reports and give insights into application performance.
  • It is a fast tool and does not take time to perform its functions.
Read full review
Cons
Amazon AWS
  • Interface (CLI) not very easy. Competition has better options.
  • Integration with IDE for test case coding.
  • Reporting for the test scripts executed.
Read full review
Micro Focus
  • HP LoadRunner with new patches and releases sometimes makes no longer support older version of various protocols like Citrix, which makes the task time-consuming when using older versions of LoadRunner for some of the cases. So it should support older version as well while upgrading.
  • Configuring HP LoadRunner over the firewall involves lots of configuration and may be troublesome. So, there should be a script (power shell script for Windows or shell script for Linux users) to make it easy to use and with less pain.
  • I would like to see the RunTime Viewer of Vugen in HPLoadRunner based on the browser I selected in the run-time configuration to make it feel more realistic as a real user.
  • Licensing cost is very high when we need to perform a test on application for a specific group of users.
Read full review
Support Rating
Amazon AWS
We had the enterprise support with AWS, so overall support experience was good with great engineers on the back providing answers. As you may know, overall AWS support is different and this is not different. Responses through the regular web support channel came easily, fast and accurate. We had questions/issues which were solved fast. Documentation is good as well, especially around the test automation pieces.
Read full review
Micro Focus
Customer service is not that great. It's difficult to get hold of someone if an issue is supposed to be addressed on an urgent basis. No online chat service readily available.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Amazon AWS
I got more features and handy within AWS Device farm than AWS Cloud9
Read full review
Micro Focus
HP performance center stacks up very well for front end applications. Need more improvements for API performance testing.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Amazon AWS
  • Quicker testing leads to faster product to market times
  • Can deploy updates much more regularly by testing across many devices quickly
Read full review
Micro Focus
  • The scripts created with traditional web/http protocol are not robust thus re-scripting is required after most every code drop. Troubleshooting and fixing the issue takes more time therefore in most cases we do re-scripting to keep it simple and save time.
  • In ideal world you would rather spend more time doing testing than scripting in that case mostly you could use an Ajax TruClient protocol. This type of script will only fail when an object in the application is removed or changed completely. This way of scripting will save you more time and helps you maintain the scripts with less re-work effort on a release basis. On the long run you will have a better ROI when you use Ajax TruClient protocol for scripting.
Read full review
ScreenShots