BlazeMeter Reviews

The use cases of BlazeMeter encompass a wide range of scenarios, including loop load testing for API-level, web service, or web application load testing. The primary purpose is to simulate various types of loads. For instance, if the load originates from distributed load testing, opting for a dedicated cloud solution would be advisable. This allows testing applications from diverse geographic locations and handling traffic from different tiers effectively. JAMITA cloud is particularly recommended for this situation, as it efficiently manages infrastructure interfaces and resolves technical intricacies associated with infrastructure maintenance.

It simplifies the process by emphasizing the key aspects of writing, uploading, and running scripts for testing purposes.

The most valuable aspect of BlazeMeter is its user-friendly nature, ability to conduct distributed load testing and comprehensive analysis and reporting features. It particularly excels in providing a clear and organized view of load test results.

BlazeMeter has room for improvement in terms of its integration with GitLab, particularly in the context of CI/CD processes. While it has multiple integrations available, the level of integration with GitLab may need further enhancements. It is known to work well with Git and Jenkins, although the extent of compatibility with GitLab is uncertain.

I have used BlazeMeter within the last 12 months.

BlazeMeter is a highly scalable solution. The solution is SaaS and the cloud vendor controls the scalability.

I have not used the support from the vendor.

The initial setup of BlazeMeter is straightforward.

I rate BlazeMeter an eight out of ten.

The solution is used as a performance system. 

It has a unique programming dashboard that is very user-friendly. The auto-collision feature is also robust. 

The scanning capability needs improvement. 

I have been using BlazeMeter for a year. 

The solution is highly scalable. Five people are using the solution at present. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. 

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment takes few minutes time and a couple of people were involved in the process. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool.

If the solution had better support and the documentation was efficient it would do better in the market.

I used BlazeMeter within the past 12 months.

BlazeMeter is a stable solution.

We have not done a lot of scalability testing with BlazeMeter to determine the full capabilities of the solution.

Small enterprises would prefer to use BlazeMeter and those companies which have a favorable budget should choose Micro Focus LoadRunner or Tricentis NeoLoad.

There is minimal support available for BlazeMeter. You have to use the internet and try to do some searches to find solutions to your problems.

I have used many similar solutions similar to BlazeMeter, such as JMeter, which I believe BlazeMeter is a customized version of JMeter. It is difficult to compare BlazeMeter to either Micro Focus LoadRunner or Tricentis NeoLoad because it is more of an open-source solution. You do not receive the high level of support that you do with paid solutions. You have to refer to the internet to resolve issues.

The difficulty level for the installation of BlazeMeter depends on how we want to implement it. It's easy to download and install, but some companies restrict the security side of it. The paid solutions are more secure compared to these open-source solutions.

The solution is free and open source.

BlazeMeter should release frequently updated demo versions of the solution to the market. They can let the internet community test it, such as crowdsourced testing, this would be good for them in the market.

I would recommend this solution to others if they have a small budget and do not have the option to buy another solution. Otherwise, Tricentis NeoLoad and Micro Focus LoadRunner are the best.

I rate BlazeMeter a four out of ten.

We use the platform for performance and load testing to ensure our applications can handle varying traffic levels.

The product's most valuable features include its cloud-based nature, which allows us to conduct tests without relying on local resources.

Additionally, linking reports with Slack for notifications has greatly benefited our team’s communication.

The product could improve in areas such as mobile testing and the integration of AI analytics.

I have been using BlazeMeter for about two weeks. 

The product is stable. 

Our entire platform is on the Google Cloud Platform (GCP), and BlazeMeter’s ability to handle various load requirements seamlessly has been beneficial.

We have used JMeter and Gatling in the past.

The platform was easy to configure and integrate into our existing pipelines.

We implemented the platform with the help of our in-house DevOps team. 

The product pricing is reasonable. 

I recommend BlazeMeter for its ease of setup and integration into continuous testing pipelines.

I rate it a nine out of ten. 

I use BlazeMeter for the different samplers it provides.

The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement.

I have been using BlazeMeter for two years. My company is a customer of the solution.

Right now, I don't know about the product's stability. I did not experience any downtime or performance issues with the solution.

For support, I generally use Google or other online sources.

Though I have experience with a solution from OpenText, I feel BlazeMeter is the best. The main reason my company chose BlazeMeter was because it was preferred by one of our clients.

The product's initial setup phase was straightforward.

The product's installation deployment phase

The solution can be deployed in thirty minutes.

The solution did not help save money or time, and neither did it improve security since it was mainly used in our company to deal with the network part.

I have not integrated the tool with any other solutions.

Though it is a good tool, there are certain areas where improvements are required in the product.

Compared to BlazeMeter, multiple options are available in the market for people to choose from to meet their requirements.

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

I mainly use BlazeMeter for scripting. I have a performance testing background, and can directly record my workload with the help of a BlazeMeter plugin. Once I've recorded I can modify a couple of enhancements. I can design my signature in BlazeMeter and choose multiple dedicated IPs, depending on our load. We are system integrators and I'm a senior engineer. 

Providing the Cloud load generator is a good feature. We can run executions from multiple locations. Very few tools provide that. They have recently started with separate API testing. I haven't had a chance to use that yet but it might be very helpful. The solution offers flexibility with its configurations, taking around two to five minutes each. You can see the metrics in a graphical view while running the tests. Response times are also visible and can filter whatever we need and get the results of error loads. 

Documentation for the solution could be improved because there are some areas, such as licensing costs, where there is a lack of information regarding structure. I'd also like the ability to see a comparison feature after carrying out several tests. I'd like to know the difference in terms of response times and other details. That would be a great feature for them to provide. 

Sometimes we'd like to include additional users during a test run to check application sustainability. We can do it from a scripting end but it would be great if BlazeMeter would provide the option of adding a few more users while running a test.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The stability is good. 

The scalability is good. 

If there are issues I update it in a chat and the technical support creates a ticket ID for follow-up. Sometimes they respond very quickly and other times they are very slow at resolving the issue. Response times are inconsistent. 

The initial setup is relatively straightforward and user-friendly. We have less than 50 users, we don't do any load tests.

I recommend BlazeMeter because of the accuracy of the results. 

I rate the solution eight out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution for performance testing. 

The solution is easy to navigate. 

The testing it offers is very useful and compatible with many platforms.

We don't have to maintain any infrastructure, as that is already provided by BlazeMeter. 

The real user monitoring feature is great.

I like that you can integrate JMeter script into the solution and run your load while testing a number of users.

The solution easily runs with end-user experience monitoring and you can run scripts right in the solution. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

The stability is good. 

The solution can scale. 

We have found the technical support to be quite helpful.

The pricing is quite reasonable.

We have already provided some sort of feedback for our BlazeMeter vendor who is directly interacting with us. We would like, for example, for there to be some sort of grouping features available. 

The should be some visibility into load testing. I'd like to capture items via snapshots. 

While they are in the cloud, it would be good to also offer on-premises options. 

I've been using the solution for about ten years. It's been about a decade. We've used it for a while. 

We've found the stability to be reliable. We're not running into any performance issues at all. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We are planning to scale up to more BlazeMeter products very soon. You can scale it well. We want to scale up to ten products a month.

Technical support has been very good so far. They are helpful and responsive. We are satisfied with the assistance overall.

We also use LoadRunner.

The solution is very straightforward to implement. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

The deployment only takes one week or so. 

The pricing of the solution is pretty good. It's not overly expensive.

We pay to license the solution every year. There are many types of license models. We have chosen the UH license model for which we pay every year.

We're a customer and an end-user.

I'd advise a company considers multiple technologies to support its goals. 

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

We used BlazeMeter for our performance testing. It allows us to run our tests on the local area network. Its primary use is to make sure that applications can handle a high load before going into the production environment. It will generate a report with the results.

The clients come up with some of the test cases and we have to validate them.

Using this product has improved the way our organization does testing.

This is a customizable product.

The documentation is good.

The sharing works well.

Having more options for customization would be helpful.

We have been using BlazeMeter for the last six months.

We have about 20 users who run over 1,000 test cases.

The technical support is good. They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us.

I started working directly with Blazemeter. There is another person in the company who is using LoadRunner and it costs about $300 per year.

The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.