We performed a comparison between Apache JMeter and Cavisson NetStorm based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Load Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product helps me get the expected performance from applications or servers and reduces costs. It also enhances the performance of the services and helped them reach their ultimate capacity."
"I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing."
"This solution is easier to use than any other tool in the market; there is not even a requirement to learn a lot of scripting in order to use it."
"The performance of the solution is excellent."
"JMeter lets us generate virtual users and T-load, per our requirements. It's easy to configure and adjusting the virtual users according to the DPS we want to achieve."
"It's easy to set up."
"It is scalable. You can scale up to 1,000 users in JMeter. If you can put up four slave servers, you can easily ramp up to 1,000 users."
"The reports and analysis tools are very good. They are the solution's most valuable features."
"This tool helps to focus on real-time transactions that occur at a very high rate."
"Designs dynamic scripts and scenarios, as per our requirements, which is one the most important feature available in NetStorm. It helps us to do performance testing of our application in a periodic way."
"NetStorm can generate high load with a single machine. Its Runlogic feature is very useful to send load to cover each and every flow of the application. NetStorm gives the feasibility of generating load with multiple load arrival models helping components to be tested based on its usage."
"The memory utilization in JMeter is very poor."
"If JMeter could provide a web version of editing, that would be good."
"Report generation needs to be improved. It is quite difficult to get to."
"Its reporting could be improved. There should be a better visual representation. That would be helpful for easy consumption of the reports."
"One of the drawbacks of JMeter is that it can't handle a large amount of load, which forces us to switch to other tools when we need to load more than a 5,000 or 10,000 user load."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"There is some work to be done with the integration."
"The solution is not user-friendly, there is no framework for autocorrelation or parameterization."
"The user interface had to be improved for the product. Its user interface should be made simple and easy to customize as per user needs."
"In the next release, we are looking for a JS instrumentation feature that would be helpful in identifying client-side issues at an early stage, or during testing."
"Need to add or support some more APIs in the Script Manager window."
Earn 20 points
Apache JMeter is ranked 1st in Load Testing Tools with 82 reviews while Cavisson NetStorm is ranked 19th in Load Testing Tools. Apache JMeter is rated 7.8, while Cavisson NetStorm is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Apache JMeter writes "It's a free tool with a vast knowledge base, but the reporting is lackluster, and it has a steep learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cavisson NetStorm writes "Has monitoring capabilities integrated into it to see the performance of components while the test is in the running phase". Apache JMeter is most compared with BlazeMeter, Postman, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and Katalon Studio, whereas Cavisson NetStorm is most compared with . See our Apache JMeter vs. Cavisson NetStorm report.
See our list of best Load Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Load Testing Tools 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.