BlazeMeter Reviews

I like the BlazeMeter extension. It is a very good expansion. With it, you can record any type of performance script scenario, and you can generate in a JMeter script, Selenium, et cetera. That is a very good feature. 

If you want to do that, it is used mostly on performance testing, API Mocking, et cetera. The API Mocking capabilities are great.

For performance, it is a very good tool and we don't have too much to do. 

It is UI-based and you can select the load generator and it is auto-scalable. You can select the origin where we want to generate load from it. We can select the bandwidth, for example. 

It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials.

The solution is stable.

I cannot recall coming across any missing features.

The reporting capabilities could be improved.

It would be ideal if it could incorporate tools such as APM or Dynatrace.

I've been using the solution for six years. It's been a while. 

We have found the solution to be stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

For the paid version, we have our own technical support for BlazeMeter. They are helpful.

The cost is a bit high for the Indian consumer. For a European or American user, the solution may not seem that expensive.

We are just customers and end-users.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We're pretty happy with its capabilities in general.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations.

Our primary use case is to create processes for performance. I created a one time function and implemented it for 1,000 users. 

I really like the recording because, with JMeter, the recording takes me a lot of time to get used to. With, BlazeMeter the recording is quick.

In terms of improvement, I would like it to have the ability to customize reports. 

We have been using BlazeMeter for around two months. 

It is stable. 

I implemented it for 1,000 users. 

The initial setup was straightforward. I deployed it myself. Because I'm new to BlazeMeter it took two days to deploy because I needed to study it first also.

I deployed and also maintain it myself. 

I also evaluated JMeter and LoadRunner but I prefer BlazeMeter because of the speed and because it's easier to use. 

I would rate it a seven out of ten. I would recommend it. 

I would like for it to be Windo-based. It should have the ability to be implemented into Windows applications. 

We have an AWS elastic beanstalk Node.js express backend with Mongodb that we expect to experience a significant amount of load in the coming weeks. 

BlazeMeter has allowed my organization to identify bottlenecks in our infrastructure and better prepare for large amounts of traffic.

The test scenario definition feature is extremely easy to use and makes configuring tests an extremely fast process. I have found this feature to be the most valuable.

More runs per month for the basic plan would be useful. Also, being able to stream logs from AWS and integrate them with the test reports would be excellent.

This solution seems very stable.

The product seems extremely scalable. 

Great and responsive!

No, this was the first solution.

It was extremely easy to get set up.

In-house team with a lot of expertise.

Cost is a little high but is reasonable for a startup at our scale. For personal use I believe the pricing for the paid plans is a bit out of reach.

BlazeMeter was the clear choice for our infrastructure.

Excellent product!

The metrics are a great feature for analyzing each test. Being able to see the errors compiled, along with their responses, has been very useful. 

We also love having the ability to compare multiple test results in one screen. The multi-test feature is very useful as well. The ease for creating tests in BlazeMeter has been wonderful.

It has allowed us to run performance tests in order to help determine if we can scale well.

The ability to run node.js scripts needs to improve.

I have used this solution for around two months.

We have not encountered any particular stability issues.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

We did not previously use a different solution.

The setup was pretty straightforward.

It would be nice to have more flexible pricing options.

Having a simple setup and being able to get the tests up and running right away, is the key for this solution.

The ability to scale JMeter tests easily. This isn't possible with traditional load testing approaches.

BlazeMeter allows us to easily run our existing load testing solutions at massive scale.

All of our consultants can use BlazeMeter. Traditionally our tests were run in JMeter and this was limited to technical users. BlazeMeter allows the use of the same tests but in a more user-friendly environment where all of our consultants can run the tests and access the results.

BlazeMeter is a cost effective way to scale our existing JMeter load tests.

Running of multi-tests could be improved to make it easier to create them. Apart from that nothing else springs to mind.

The application has been stable in most of our tests to date. We experience the odd bug, but BlazeMeter are quick to resolve any issues.

We have tested up to hundreds of thousands of concurrent users and the system performed well.

Easy to use and effective.

Initial setup is very easy.

When selecting a vendor, I look at ease of use, support, product maturity, and their partner model.

BlazeMeter is a great solution to run your existing tests. You will need detailed knowledge of JMeter to get the most out of your testing and BlazeMeter offer comprehensive training if you are new to this.

Load generation over cloud is the most valuable feature. This feature is most valuable for us because we use BlazeMeter for load testing. This helps us procure the required load generation infrastructure.

I have used BlazeMeter personally and my experience has been:

Whenever we want to provision more load generators (10 or more), it takes too long to initiate the test. Sometimes, the load generators have not even started and after waiting for 10 minutes or more, we get to know that we need to restart. This creates an awkward situation, when the client is also monitoring live execution and waiting for the test to start.

I have come across multiple instances, where the actual test was run for x hours but the server hours that were deducted from my account, were on the basis of x+1 hours. I have to keep monitoring the usage report frequently and request for credit back of all such server hours. Although, I get them back without any argument with the BlazeMeter team but still, it creates an overhead for me.

It needs to improve the server hour calculation and the provisioning of load generation machines.

I have used this solution for more than six months.

We had some stability issues; sometimes the load generators do not start at all.

We encountered some scalability issues. The start time for load test increases with the increase in number of users to be simulated.

I would give the technical support a 5/10.

The setup was straightforward.

The pricing could be more competitive.

We did not evaluate any other options.

Other than URL testing, there are no pieces of this software that are actually useful to us.

We were planning to load test this product for a significant release. It was somewhat helpful.

There are only certain features that actually work. Their URL testing and JMeter tests work only if testing URLs. If testing anything else, like WebDriver tests using JMeter and BlazeMeter, they do not work.

We have used it for close to two years but we are planning to NOT extend our licensing.

We had stability problems several times and we lost all our credits.

We did have scalability problems.

Technical support was OK for some situations.

We did not use a previous solution.

Setup was straightforward and simple.

I feel it’s overpriced unless they fix several things on their end.

We did evaluate other options, but we chose this one because setup was easy.

Look for your needs. This product is not a complete load-testing solution. It does offer certain types of load testing like URL testing but, other than that, we did not find them useful.